[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] smartmontools: import from OE classic

[Koen Kooi]

Op 3 mei 2013, om 16:30 heeft Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com> het volgende geschreven:

> On Friday 03 May 2013 16:10:40 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Op 27 apr. 2013, om 13:13 heeft Paul Eggleton 
> <paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com> het volgende geschreven:
>>> On Saturday 27 April 2013 06:34:46 Philip Balister wrote:
>>>> On 04/27/2013 04:24 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>>>> On Friday 26 April 2013 23:41:38 Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>>>> And do you really need a .inc?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Are we removing inc files if they were present in OE Classic? First I've
>>>>> heard if we are...
>>>> 
>>>> If we are trying to reduce the number of versions of recipes we carry,
>>>> dropping .inc files would seem to be a good idea. I don't have strong
>>>> feelings, but it seems like something we should consider.
>>> 
>>> I agree we should try to keep only one version of each recipe in software
>>> layers, however I figure it makes it easier for people to carry their own
>>> versions of recipes in distro layers (particularly older, which may be
>>> required in certain circumstances) if we do keep inc files where they
>>> already exist.
>> 
>> Can people raise their hand if they want to have a different version of
>> smartmontools in their layer?
> 
> Even assuming everyone who could possibly want this is reading this thread, 
> which is unlikely, in the absence of time machines you won't hear from anyone 
> who doesn't need it now but does in the future. 
> 
> As a general rule, people do often want to build versions of recipes from SCM 
> repositories and having an inc file makes that a bit easier. If we already have 
> the inc file split I can't see a compelling reason to drop it.
> 
> I would also point out that we were asked to preserve these in the original 
> move to OE-Core and as far as I am aware we have done so.

It's unnecessary clutter and in the smartmontools case unneeded as well.