On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 9:58 AM Richard Purdie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2021-12-07 at 17:53 +0000, Ross Burton wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Dec 2021 at 17:15, Konrad Weihmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > TBF
> > >
> > > the correct fix would be
> > >
> > > magic.bbclass
> > > ---
> > > DEPENDS:append = " magic-dependency"
> > > ---
> > >
> > > but unfortunately sometimes this is out of our control (as we don't want
> > > to have bbclassappends for totally valid reasons)
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > Personally, I'd say that's the correct fix, and any class that
> > DEPENDS= is just broken. Recipes should be able to do DEPENDS= because
> > that's convenient, and classes should use DEPENDS:append.
>
> This is complicated by the issue that such appends are near impossible to
> override, so you end up with the conditional bits in autotools/base.bbclass
> adding variables to set to stop the behaviour. Classes should be a starting
> point for things, not a hard requirement the recipe can't override.
If the goal is to let the recipe undo changes made by a .bbclass then
one easy solution is indirection. The class can use:
MAGIC_DEPENDS ?= "foo"
DEPENDS:append = " ${MAGIC_DEPENDS}"
Recipes can then override MAGIC_DEPENDS as required.
> I actually much prefer += in recipes for that reason but as you say, people
> like
> to use = and then the problem continues. This kind of issue is one of the
> things
> we really need to solve as a project and is probably the most pressing syntax
> problem. See the PACKAGECONFIG discussion/dilemma too.
I've seen the discussion. No real explanation of what the dilemma is though...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#1377):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1377
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87569589/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
