[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] rm_work.bbclass: inhibit rm_work per recipe

Paul Eggleton paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com
Tue Mar 26 17:52:00 UTC 2013


On Tuesday 26 March 2013 17:25:52 Phil Blundell wrote:
> This doesn't seem (at the risk of invoking an unintended metaphor)
> entirely black or white.  Maybe it should just be "RM_WORK_EXCEPTIONS"
> or something.

"exception" has another meaning to my mind. I've sent out a patch to change it 
to RM_WORK_EXCLUDE.

> Of course, you can get the same effect in your distro configuration by
> saying:
> 
> RM_WORK = "rm_work"
> RM_WORK_pn-icu-native = ""
> INHERIT += "${RM_WORK}"
> 
> so I must admit to being slightly ambivalent about whether the extra
> syntactic sugar is all that valuable.  

True, that works; I think having an explicit variable makes it easier to 
understand what's going on though and is a little harder to typo and have your 
work removed when you didn't want it to be ;)

> And then again you can always use rm_old_work instead. :-)

I'm sure this has come up before, but is rm_old_work something we ought to 
have in OE-Core?

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre




More information about the Openembedded-core mailing list