[OE-core] [PATCH 3/4] task-base: allow distribution to define apm provider

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Koen Kooi <koen at dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>
> Op 27 apr 2011, om 22:08 heeft Khem Raj het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:34:55AM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 10:00 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa at gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-base.bb |    5 ++++-
>>>>>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-base.bb b/meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-base.bb
>>>>> index 138e617..10f3af4 100644
>>>>> --- a/meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-base.bb
>>>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/tasks/task-base.bb
>>>>> @@ -179,8 +179,11 @@ RDEPENDS_task-base-acpi = "\
>>>>>      acpid \
>>>>>      libacpi "
>>>>>
>>>>> +# Distro can override apm provider
>>>>> +DISTRO_APM ?= "apm"
>>>>> +
>>>>>  RDEPENDS_task-base-apm = "\
>>>>> -    apm \
>>>>> +    ${DISTRO_APM} \
>>>>>      apmd"
>>>>
>>>> Can you explain a little more about why a distro would do this please?
>>>> I'm a little worried this whole file could become a set of DISTRO_*
>>>> variables :/.
>>>>
>>
>> may be define virtual/apm package and use that in RDEPENDS
>
> runtime virtuals are a *bad* *bad* idea. At least opkg has no way of handling those.
>

hmm my suggestion was meant for DEPENDS if possible :) not runtime

> regards,
>
> Koen
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>