[OE-core] Fwd: kernel-yocto class requires BSP definition now

[Andrei Gherzan]

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Andrei Gherzan <andrei at gherzan.ro> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Bruce Ashfield <
>> bruce.ashfield at windriver.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Already discussed with Khem and Richard in the original
>>> thread.
>>>
>>> I'm sending another patch shortly to back this off to a note/warning.
>>>
>>>
>> That is nice but wouldn't that clutter the build logs for no reason? For
>> people who don't take advantage of scc definitions that is. Could you point
>> me to the initial discussion? Just want to understand and maybe vote to
>> remove it altogether.
>>
>
> It's a yocto bug. We need to flag BSP definitions that aren't valid,
> otherwise the tools
> will end up building things like qemuarm for someone that has a
> misconfigured BSP.
>
> If you don't have a defconfig (as someone won't have if they are using a
> fully defined
> BSP, but with the wrong name) and the wrong entry point, or no entry
> point, is returned
> we have to flag it.
>
> The actual bug is: 11878, and there's a related fallout of that bad
> definition.
>
> So no, it won't be deleted, but I will make it check for a few more
> parameters before
> erroring or logging.
>

That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. I'll keep an eye on the ml for the
fix.

--
Andrei Gherzan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20170823/ecdcc08d/attachment-0002.html>