On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Christopher Larson wrote:
> The most specific overrides the least specific. Machine wins over
> target arch, local wins over all. In the code, the overrides are
> collapsed in the order of the overrides variable, left to right, so
> the last will win.
>
> -- Chris Larson
>
> On Jan 16, 2010, at 6:01 AM, "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> > from the manual:
> >
> > OVERRIDES is a “:” separated variable containing each item you want to
> > satisfy conditions. So, if you have a variable which is conditional on
> > “arm”, and “arm” is in OVERRIDES, then the “arm” specific version of
> > the variable is used rather than the non-conditional version. Example:
> >
> > OVERRIDES = "architecture:os:machine"
> > TEST = "defaultvalue"
> > TEST_os = "osspecificvalue"
> > TEST_condnotinoverrides = "othercondvalue"
> >
> > In this example, TEST would be osspecificvalue, due to the
> > condition “os” being in OVERRIDES.
> >
> > and what *would* happen if that second conditional variable was
> > also in OVERRIDES? would it override the first one? that should
> > be clarified here.
ah, so the order of *assignments* isn't important, it's the order of
the variables within the OVERRIDES string? so, using the above
example, if i had:
TEST = "default"
TEST_machine = "machine"
TEST_os = "os"
the final value of TEST would be "machine" since it appears in the
OVERRIDES string furthest to the right, is that it? even though "os"
was assigned last.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================_______________________________________________
Bitbake-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bitbake-dev
