[OE-core] [PATCH] busybox-1.21.1/defconfig: disable rfkill

Tue Aug 13 10:35:34 UTC 2013

On 13/08/13 11:19, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> I personally dislike top posting for a single entity in an email and I
> think that is "nigh unbearable". ;-)

If you also have a dislike for top-posting, then why top-post?!

> 
> More to the point, if there is no documentation, why is the bugreport
> closed rather than forming it into a documentation bugreport?

I am sure a bug-report for adding busybox config fragment documentation
would be accepted.

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/buglist.cgi?product=General%20Docs&component=docs-general&resolution=---

> 
> Also, I am still not sure we are on the same paper. You mean the python
> script snippet will become optional? How will that mapping be done for
> every possible options without adding explicit things to a feature set
> like PACKAGECONFIG?

I only answered the direct question in the email which is somewhere in
the mess below, I couldn't bare to wade through the previous dredge.
Hence, I have no idea with regards to any manual intervention with a
python script. Going by the bug report, and the steps that I have seen,
it should be automatic and as simple as dropping in a config fragment
into the busybox recipe folder.

Cheers,

> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Jack Mitchell <ml at communistcode.co.uk
> <mailto:ml at communistcode.co.uk>> wrote:
> 
>     On 13/08/13 10:52, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>     > As we have already discussed that, it is not any clear at all without
>     > example. Yes, the end user does not really care about the internal
>     > implementation of the feature ....
>     >
>     > Please provide useful examples and tutorials how to use a feature
>     > especially when a user (and apparently others posting here) is such
>     > clueless.
>     >
>     > Oh, by the way, and I have mentioned this in the bug report as
>     well. We
>     > need proper documentation, examples, and tutorials; i.e. I am not
>     ahead
>     > of the day when I first read this post. ;-)
>     >
>     >
>     > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Burton, Ross
>     <ross.burton at intel.com <mailto:ross.burton at intel.com>
>     > <mailto:ross.burton at intel.com <mailto:ross.burton at intel.com>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     On 13 August 2013 08:32, Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org
>     <mailto:lpapp at kde.org>
>     >     <mailto:lpapp at kde.org <mailto:lpapp at kde.org>>> wrote:
>     >     > So, everyone suggested PACKAGECONFIG in here on the mailing list
>     >     except Khem
>     >     > whose reply I did not get.
>     >     >
>     >     > Yet, 4964 got closed by the "team". Could anyone please give
>     a sane
>     >     > description why and what would block the end users other
>     than fork?
>     >
>     >     Quoting from comment 1 on 4964:
>     >
>     >     """
>     >     Busybox is a rather complicated beast. PACKAGECONFIG is
>     unfortunately
>     >     not sufficient to manage it's config system. It is very
>     similar to the
>     >     Linux kernel config and we recently added configuration fragment
>     >     support to busybox from the kernel recipes:
>     >
>     >     commit 56dc1720caa48344238d352c7b6e9b0f0d41aa54
>     >     Author: Chen Qi <Qi.Chen at windriver.com
>     <mailto:Qi.Chen at windriver.com> <mailto:Qi.Chen at windriver.com
>     <mailto:Qi.Chen at windriver.com>>>
>     >     Date:   Tue Feb 5 14:36:40 2013 +0800
>     >
>     >         busybox: add config fragments
>     >
>     >     This allows you to use the default config and include only the
>     delta
>     >     in your layer's bbappend in the form of a config fragment
>     added to the
>     >     SRC_URI.
>     >     """
>     >
>     >     If this isn't sufficient or is buggy, then fixing this is
>     preferred
>     >     (it works for the kernel, so should work for busybox).
>     >
>     >     Ross
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
> 
>     1) The top posting in this thread is nigh unbearable, please bottom post
>     in order to keep the flow of conversation.
> 
>     2) The busybox config fragments was added in this cycle, which is
>     probably the reason for no official documentation yet.
> 
>     3) There is an example in the bug report where it was added
>     (https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3379) which you can
>     look at if you wish to be an early adopter and test this _new_ feature.
> 
>     4) For simplicity I have copied the explanation in below:
> 
>     > Steps:
>     > 1. Add a new cal.cfg file to meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox-1.20.2/
>     > $ cat cal.cfg
>     > CONFIG_CAL=y
>     >
>     > 2. Run "bitbake busybox"
>     > Check the
>     build/tmp/work/armv5te-poky-linux-gnueabi/busybox/1.20.2-r5/busybox-1.20.2/.config
>     file.
>     > The CONFIG_CAL should be set to y.
>     >
>     > 3. Run "bitbake core-image-minimal"
>     > Boot up the image, the cal command should be exist.
>     > root at qemuarm:~# which cal
>     > /usr/bin/cal
>     > root at qemuarm:~# ls -l /usr/bin/cal
>     > lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root            12 Mar  1 06:17
>     /usr/bin/cal -> /bin/busybox
>     > root at qemuarm:~#
> 
>     So, all you need to do is add CONFIG_RFKILL=n or whatever the config
>     name is and that should remove rfkill from the busybox command set.
> 
>     Regards,
> 
>     --
>       Jack Mitchell (jack at embed.me.uk <mailto:jack at embed.me.uk>)
>       Embedded Systems Engineer
>       Cambrideshire, UK
>       http://www.embed.me.uk
>     --
>     _______________________________________________
>     Openembedded-core mailing list
>     Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org
>     <mailto:Openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org>
>     http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
> 
> 

-- 
  Jack Mitchell (jack at embed.me.uk)
  Embedded Systems Engineer
  Cambrideshire, UK
  http://www.embed.me.uk
--