[Openembedded-architecture] Yocto Compatible 2.0 + signature changes

[Patrick Ohly]

On Fri, 2017-05-12 at 08:20 -0500, Joshua Watt wrote:
> > That would lead to a combinatorial explosion of potential paths that
> > would need to be checked when deciding whether to reparse, because the
> > actual file path most likely uses one or a few of the many overrides in
> > OVERRIDES. It's probably doable, just something to be aware of.
> 
> Ya, come to think of it, something like (where "foo" is in OVERRIDES):
> 
>  BBAPPENDPATHS_foo += "${LAYERDIR}/foo/recipes-*/*/*.bbappend"
> 
> might be better for that reason. It would move the exponential search
> into bitbakes variable cache in memory instead of having to search the
> disk

At this point we probably need a comment from Richard whether this is
actually feasible...

> > The same caveat as for the conditional include applies: only overrides
> > set in the base configuration can be used, and they must be the same for
> > all configurations in a multiconfig build.
> 
> I'm not too familiar with mutliconfig, but that does seems like it
> would need to be solved... does this stem from all of them sharing a
> bblayer.conf, and hence everyone currently gets the same BBPATH?

Yes.

>  It
> seems like allowing config specific BBPATHS (or BBAPPENDPATHS) might
> be able solve that problem?

I'm not sure.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.