[oe] [RFC] Bring PREFERRED_LIBC to all distros
Koen Kooi
k.kooi at student.utwente.nl
Mon May 11 07:03:46 UTC 2009
On 11-05-09 00:36, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Hello Tom,
>>
>> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Tom Rini<trini at embeddedalley.com> wrote:
>>> Not too wierd looking? Otherwise, is there somewhere we can do,
>>> roughly, sort -u, on ${OVERRIDES} ? And not require a new bitbake for
>>> everyone?
How do you decide which one to drop? The one with a lower or higher
priority? You can see how that gets real ugly real fast.
>> I belive that we shouldn't add hacks into OE recipes to avoid the
>> requirement of new bitbake. If someone is using dev tree we can assume
>> that this person can also use a development version from bitbake
>> stable branch.
>
> I don't mean a hack to glibc*.bb, but rather changing base.bbclass (and
> anything else) to not blow up if OVERRIDES contains duplicates. I think
> it's possible to add a python function that does it, but it would have
> to be 'slow' since the fast method is to throw everything into a dict
> and then return the list of keys. So perhaps it's best to just say
> libc-<foo> for an additional per-libc override.
libc-<foo> is also a lot clearer in the case of newlib :)
regards,
Koen
More information about the Openembedded-devel
mailing list