[OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] psplash fixes

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 19:48 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 19 dec. 2011, om 19:32 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > On Monday 19 December 2011 19:27:06 Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> Op 19 dec. 2011, om 19:22 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
> >>> On Monday 19 December 2011 18:50:35 Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>> Op 19 dec. 2011, om 18:43 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
> >>>>> Set the default psplash image to the OpenEmbedded logo, and provide
> >>>>> a
> >>>>> script to allow people to use their own custom image.
> >>>> 
> >>>> What I did in OE-classic and meta-angstrom is to use
> >>>> update-alternatives to provide different psplash images. This way you
> >>>> can choose a different splash for each image instead of having a
> >>>> distro wide one. Is something like that suitable for oe-core as well?
> >>> 
> >>> Sounds like a useful capability, however, does this mean that when you
> >>> want to override it in the image you end up with both psplash versions
> >>> installed?
> >> in a splashless image you can just do 'IMAGE_INSTALL += psplash-angstrom and
> >> it will only install that one. If you want to reuse an existing, unmodified
> >> image with psplash and add your own, then you will end up with both.
> > 
> > Although I guess another way to do it would be to do a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME type 
> > thing like we do for other such selections. At the moment in OE-core, psplash 
> > is brought in via task-core-console, and whilst it is a separate variable that 
> > could be overridden it's a task which once built really makes it impossible to 
> > customise per-image.
> > 
> > What about a "splash" IMAGE_FEATURE and then a VIRTUAL-RUNTIME_splash to 
> > select which psplash to install?
> 
> I will say again: I absolutely HATE that virtual-runtime nonsense. If
> you need to change a task, change the task, don't introduce things
> that make it non deterministic. Guess what happens when you change a
> virtual-runtime *after* you have built the task already.

That virtual-runtime stuff is clearly distro related and should only be
changed at the distro level. Doing anything else with it isn't
supported.

The splash screen issue strikes me as a distro level issue with
different distro's wanting to rebrand as needed. It therefore seems
appropriate to handle psplash that way?

Having them parallel installed seems overly complex and a solution in
search of a problem :/

And yes, personally I dislike the virtual-runtime stuff too but the
alternative is a ton of copies of recipes with one line changes which I
dislike more.

Cheers,

Richard