[oe] generate a named kernel in ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/9/29 Andrea Adami <andrea.adami at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks
> <fransmeulenbroeks at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2010/9/29 Andrea Adami <andrea.adami at gmail.com>:

>> I would have expected you had to add something like:
>> FILESPATHPKG_append = ":linux-${PV}"
>> I had to add this to get access to the linux patches.
>
> No need to extend FILESPATHPKG being we keep the patches in the
> kernel-specific dirs: e.g. /linux-2.6.34 and /linux-kexecboot-2.6.34

Ah ok, I understand. As I am building different versions of the
standard kernel, I am using those patches
I assumed kexecboot also used the same patches as the kernel does.
I expected these would apply to the kexecboot kernel with the same name.

>
>>
>> And this:
>> S = "${WORKDIR}/linux-${PV}"
>> might perhaps better end up in the base recipe (in my case linux_2.6.34.bb)
>
> I misunderstand perhaps: this is in each recipe (e.g.
> linux-kexecboot_2.6.34.bb). Do you mean moving it in
> linux-kexecboot.inc?

No. My recipe is slightly different and does a require linux_${PV} but
as the requiring recipe is named differently ${PN} and hence ${S} is
differently from the required recipe.
I had to define S in my recipe, and I was wondering whether it would
be better to move that line to the base linux_${PN}} recipe
>
>
>> (actually thinking of it the FILESPATHPKG might also be moved into there).
>>
>> Should I prepare a patch for that ?
> Sorry, not sure about the question.
>
The question was whether it would be better to explicitly say
 S = "${WORKDIR}/linux-${PV}"
in linux_${PN}.bb
then S is always automatically ok for everyone who includes it.

not a big change and not very important either.

Frans