From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 09910E00A5B; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (raj.khem[at]gmail.com) * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [209.85.192.177 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com (mail-pd0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AF8CE00A3C for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pdbnt7 with SMTP id nt7so20763975pdb.0 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=0HRIEc4etkWZHcWLDwH4XaZc0e0eBox/7RQY2ObnYOg=; b=CjeKj9A5xPliefuyzr3DX2EoXQQD6z3T6XxElXxEbvWC28z/Fhytp0kO/3FhfAD+AH UjjV/0r8MfOFnbL8jHc5i9H6i5klR5Vhh+KL9WZ/PA5kbAieRq4eEvoijas9Ip+yBAml gUxwvRPnT/WNKTRwAN4bAkcinlVNSHE3S+r06dNlTi0sEG2YAJje4cg+3qhG34DR9KVv TeGcH1xhmLWWCPr3snLWfrOafjqLLX0tGZ9YkFcIf2tUGfGvW0mLGhyC4DPRoPA8Zd/y NqPzT2QgrR9AsgpBsjQw0X9dEuxcpKOS+E1nfApaPu92+S1+a7dtGqeShXx2hphvqALE n9HQ== X-Received: by 10.70.118.5 with SMTP id ki5mr37557289pdb.6.1437784652980; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.70.81.133 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55AE6705.5040907@mlbassoc.com> References: <55AE6705.5040907@mlbassoc.com> From: Khem Raj Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:03 -0700 Message-ID: To: openembeded-devel Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: [oe] Question about IMAGE_INSTALL_append and CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 00:37:36 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Gary Thomas wrote: > On 2015-07-21 09:26, Victor Rodriguez wrote: >> >> Hi team >> >> I have a question , according to documentation there is a difference >> between >> >> IMAGE_INSTALL_append >> >> and >> >> CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL >> >> Specifies the list of packages to be added to the image. You should >> only set this variable in the local.conf configuration file found in >> the Build Directory. >> >> When I use the second one and try to build a core-image-minimal-xfce >> bitbake does not install what I wanted in my image . I had a really >> hard time few weekends ago because of this. >> >> I wonder If I am missing something or if this is a bug > > > The core-image-minimal-xfce recipe does not "play nice" with > the core-image class and is not respecting CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL. its not required to. > > I think this should be filed as a bug (and feel free to suggest a patch) > No. Its not OE-Core or yocto bug > BTW, this question should really be on the OpenEmbedded development list. its valid for meta-xfce only. > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Gary Thomas | Consulting for the > MLB Associates | Embedded world > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f171.google.com (mail-pd0-f171.google.com [209.85.192.171]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB79761CA for ; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 00:37:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pdjr16 with SMTP id r16so21005921pdj.3 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=0HRIEc4etkWZHcWLDwH4XaZc0e0eBox/7RQY2ObnYOg=; b=CjeKj9A5xPliefuyzr3DX2EoXQQD6z3T6XxElXxEbvWC28z/Fhytp0kO/3FhfAD+AH UjjV/0r8MfOFnbL8jHc5i9H6i5klR5Vhh+KL9WZ/PA5kbAieRq4eEvoijas9Ip+yBAml gUxwvRPnT/WNKTRwAN4bAkcinlVNSHE3S+r06dNlTi0sEG2YAJje4cg+3qhG34DR9KVv TeGcH1xhmLWWCPr3snLWfrOafjqLLX0tGZ9YkFcIf2tUGfGvW0mLGhyC4DPRoPA8Zd/y NqPzT2QgrR9AsgpBsjQw0X9dEuxcpKOS+E1nfApaPu92+S1+a7dtGqeShXx2hphvqALE n9HQ== X-Received: by 10.70.118.5 with SMTP id ki5mr37557289pdb.6.1437784652980; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.70.81.133 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55AE6705.5040907@mlbassoc.com> References: <55AE6705.5040907@mlbassoc.com> From: Khem Raj Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 17:37:03 -0700 Message-ID: To: openembeded-devel Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: [yocto] Question about IMAGE_INSTALL_append and CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 00:37:33 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Gary Thomas wrote: > On 2015-07-21 09:26, Victor Rodriguez wrote: >> >> Hi team >> >> I have a question , according to documentation there is a difference >> between >> >> IMAGE_INSTALL_append >> >> and >> >> CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL >> >> Specifies the list of packages to be added to the image. You should >> only set this variable in the local.conf configuration file found in >> the Build Directory. >> >> When I use the second one and try to build a core-image-minimal-xfce >> bitbake does not install what I wanted in my image . I had a really >> hard time few weekends ago because of this. >> >> I wonder If I am missing something or if this is a bug > > > The core-image-minimal-xfce recipe does not "play nice" with > the core-image class and is not respecting CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL. its not required to. > > I think this should be filed as a bug (and feel free to suggest a patch) > No. Its not OE-Core or yocto bug > BTW, this question should really be on the OpenEmbedded development list. its valid for meta-xfce only. > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Gary Thomas | Consulting for the > MLB Associates | Embedded world > ------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel