On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <[email protected]> wrote: > MACHINE_KERNEL_PR was introduced long ago in org.oe.dev. It's present in > meta-oe kernel.bbclass. Several machines depend on this functionality.
I don' t have a big problem with this, since the change is obviously harmless if it doesn't need to be used. But similar to my comment on patch 3/5, is there any history/technical reasons we can capture here ? I did a quick search to dig up a bit on this myself, but a summary would definitely help, since I see that this has a long and sometimes twisting history. Is it as simple as ? "A machine.conf or local.conf can increase MACHINE_KERNEL_PR to force rebuilds for kernel and external modules" Cheers, Bruce > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <[email protected]> > --- > meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 5 +++++ > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass > index c577011..b44e3b5 100644 > --- a/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/kernel.bbclass > @@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ python __anonymous () { > image = bb.data.getVar('INITRAMFS_IMAGE', d, True) > if image: > bb.data.setVar('INITRAMFS_TASK', '${INITRAMFS_IMAGE}:do_rootfs', d) > + > + machine_kernel_pr = bb.data.getVar('MACHINE_KERNEL_PR', d, True) > + > + if machine_kernel_pr: > + bb.data.setVar('PR', machine_kernel_pr, d) > } > > inherit kernel-arch deploy > -- > 1.7.2.5 > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
