On Tue, 2021-06-15 at 11:42 +0000, Quentin Schulz wrote: > > On June 15, 2021 10:29:01 AM UTC, Richard Purdie > <[email protected]> wrote: > > We have an interesting problem with initramfs images. They do something > > like: > > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" > > > > which looks innocent enough until a BSP does: > > > > IMAGE_FSTYPES_collie = "xxx" > > > > where collie is MACHINE, hence an override which causes confusion as > > the value of INITRAMFS_FSTYPES is never used for that machine. > > > > Is that an issue that needs to actually be fixed? This is just another > example > of weird BSP given by vendors to me, right?
Well, it seems like an ok thing for a BSP to do to me. There are probably other ways it could be done, sure. > Resetting IMAGE_FSTYPES_collie to INITRAMFS_FSTYPES should be enough > to fix this issue right? No, I don't see how that helps. > > The questions are > > a) is another assignment operator a good idea? > > I'm not sure the issue explained in this mail is enough to warrant a new > assignment operator. The issue in the email is an example of a general problem where it is effectively impossible to undo certain operations. That general issue bothers me more than this specific case. We can argue the BSP is broken. The BSP is arguing bitbake is broken. Failing that, there is an argument the initramfs recipes are broken. I can see the different sides but there is a general problem here we've pondered over for a while. > I can already see vendors abusing this by always using this new operator > instead of using overrides or whatever. We could ban the operator from conf files (enforced)? > This would be even less fun to support on IRC or mailing lists. Maybe, maybe not. It depends how it gets used and if "abuse" occurs. > Also... As opposed to other operators, what would happen if you use the > following: IMAGE_FSTYPES_collir *:= "whatever". What would be the meaning > and behavior, it might warrant a different handling compared to other > operators to forbid any override (and append, prepend, remove). > Thankfully that is quite clear and would clear any overrides set against "IMAGE_FSTYPES_collir" > > b) if so, which form? > > > > Totally unbiased. The last two 😁 > It highlights that like := it is an immediate assignment operator. > The asterisk indicates that it will apply to "everything". Except that half the behaviour of := doesn't apply (the expansion). := is immediate expansion *and* immediate assignment. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1230): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1230 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/83552628/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
