[oe] Question about OVERRIDES precedence

[Chris Larson]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi at student.utwente.nl>wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 13-10-10 23:38, Chris Larson wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Maupin, Chase <chase.maupin at ti.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> That was my thought as well but I can consistently cause this issue.  I
> >> have tested a quick change that seems to fix the issue by reversing the
> list
> >> before it is used in the for loop.  My change was:
> >
> >
> > From discussion on IRC, we think we should just reverse the definition of
> > OVERRIDES in OE, this avoids compatibility issues associated with
> changing
> > the implementation.
>
> Isn't the definition covered in the bitbake docs? I'm in favour of
> fixing bitbake instead working around it in OE.
>

As far as I can tell:
1. The bitbake docs don't cover the ordering.
2. The behavior isn't a bug, it's a mismatch between OE's definition and
bitbake's implementation, and bitbake has been this way since 2003.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics