From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] wic: Use custom kernel path if provided From: "Richard Purdie" Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2022 23:02:56 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-id: To: Bill Pittman , "openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org" On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 16:54 +0000, Bill Pittman wrote: > If the custom kernel path is provided in options, then > use that path instead of the default path. > > Signed-off-by: Bill Pittman > --- >  scripts/wic | 3 +++ >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/scripts/wic b/scripts/wic > index a741aed364..29a157bf37 100755 > --- a/scripts/wic > +++ b/scripts/wic > @@ -159,6 +159,9 @@ def wic_create_subcommand(options, usage_str): >                             "(Use -e/--image-name to specify it)") >          native_sysroot = options.native_sysroot >   > +    if options.kernel_dir: > +        kernel_dir = options.kernel_dir > + >      if not options.vars_dir and (not native_sysroot or not > os.path.isdir(native_sysroot)): >          logger.info("Building wic-tools...\n") >          subprocess.check_call(["bitbake", "wic-tools"]) The concern with these kinds of changes is I can't really test it or tell if it is the right thing to do and I worry about it regressing in the future. Is there part of the test coverage we should be improving too? wic does have fairly good coverage from oe-selftest -r wic Cheers, Richard