On Thu, 7 May 2026 at 14:37, Ross Burton <[email protected]> wrote:

> To be honest I think I disagree with you here.  There’s already a load of 
> “build pipeline” tools from sh scripts to Makefiles to the multitude of  task 
> runners written in every language under the run (invoke, rake, etc).
>
> Does the world need another one?

The idea is that bitbake-setup should help users do something useful
with a build they set up, by providing a standard UI. You'd type
$ bitbake-setup run
and it will give you a selection of what's possible, and then proceed
to do it. It's the equivalent of 'kas build', just more flexible :)

If someone has written their pipeline with make or a shell script,
then bitbake-setup can simply run that (e.g. a pipeline containing a
single step), but I think there's also value in having 'native'
support for multi-step pipelines. They're simple (e.g. executable
commands are static strings that can't be parametrized), and if that's
not flexible enough, there's indeed plenty of industrial-grade tools.

Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#2333): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/2333
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/119195970/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to