[OE-core] can one add a "packagegroup" simply by adding the recipe file for it?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  wait, i think i might have just answered my own question ... see
below ...

On Sat, 12 Oct 2013, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

>   just to make sure i'm not missing anything subtle, i know you can
> add a "packagegroup" to your build using IMAGE_FEATURES, but given
> that there are *lots* more packagegroup recipe files in oe-core than
> have corresponding PACKAGE_GROUP_* definitions in core-image.bbclass:
>
> $ find . -name "packagegroup*bb"
> ./recipes-gnome/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-standalone-gmae-sdk-target.bb
> ./recipes-gnome/packagegroups/packagegroup-toolset-native.bb
> ./recipes-gnome/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-sdk-gmae.bb
> ./recipes-devtools/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-device-devel.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-cross-canadian.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-sdk.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-ssh-openssh.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-standalone-sdk-target.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-tools-profile.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-self-hosted.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-ssh-dropbear.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-tools-debug.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-buildessential.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-tools-testapps.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-base.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-nfs.bb
> ./recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-eclipse-debug.bb
> ./recipes-graphics/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-x11.bb
> ./recipes-graphics/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-x11-base.bb
> ./recipes-graphics/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-x11-xserver.bb
> ./recipes-graphics/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-clutter.bb
> ./recipes-graphics/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-directfb.bb
> ./recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-qte-toolchain-target.bb
> ./recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt4e.bb
> ./recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-qt-toolchain-target.bb
> ./recipes-qt/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-qt.bb
> ./recipes-sato/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-x11-sato.bb
> ./recipes-extended/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-lsb.bb
> ./recipes-extended/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-basic.bb
> $
>
> is it accurate to say that you can just as equivalently add the recipe
> file directly using, say, CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL? is there any
> functional difference between those two approaches?

  feeling a bit sheepish if this is the answer ... i notice that
core-image.bbclass defines:

  PACKAGE_GROUP_nfs-server = "packagegroup-core-nfs-server"

however, while there is no recipe file named
"packagegroup-core-nfs-server.bb", there is one named
"packagegroup-core-nfs.bb", which contains:

  inherit packagegroup

  PACKAGES = "${PN}-server"

so does defining a PACKAGE_GROUP_* entry in core-image.bbclass allow
the packagegroup definition search to examine the internals of a
recipe file to check the definition of "PACKAGES" to find a match? as
opposed to referring to a recipe file directly which must *exactly*
match the name of the recipe file?

  thanks for any clarification.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================