<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra">Hi Khem,</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 8 July 2015 at 05:16, Khem Raj <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:raj.khem@gmail.com" target="_blank">raj.khem@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":5j1" class="a3s" style="overflow:hidden">There might be recipes in other layers which might be using .inc file, drm is sometimes<br>
specific to some SOCs. layer index shows that atleast meta-ti assumes .inc to be available<br>
and there might be more unlisted or closed layers which do so.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Looking at the meta-ti recipe, it rewrites so much of the include file that practically the only bits it is using are the summary and inherits. If that were my layer I'd copy the pieces from oe-core that it needed and consider it a proper fork (or upstream the drivers and drop the recipe).</div><div><br></div><div><insert standard moan about include files for cross-layer use without a defined "api" for their behaviour and expectations></div><div><br></div><div>Ross</div></div></div></div>