On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 13:20 +0000, mikko.rap...@bmw.de wrote: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 02:11:13PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:19 +0000, mikko.rap...@bmw.de wrote: > > > > That was one old way, but not the only. And not for exposing > > > > non > > > > uapi > > > > headers. > > > > > > What other ways exist? > > > > > > I don't care how, but I must export custom kernel specific > > > headers > > > and > > > other files to other recipes in a build in ways which are > > > compatible > > > with > > > yocto upstream. > > > > > > I have not seen any documented ways for this. > > > > It may not be documented, perhaps because its actually very simple. > > > > Any recipe can expose headers into the recipe sysroot, they simply > > install them where needed in do_install as normal. > > > > So all you need is a recipe which installs the right headers and > > then > > you DEPEND on that recipe. Where that recipe gets the headers isn't > > relevant. > > No, this does not work on sumo. My patch is needed for this to work. > > Without my patch, users of kernel.bbclass have zero files in > tmp/sysroot-components even if they install extra files and extra > header only binary packages. > > A generated image or SDK will have the files if the binary package is > installed but sysroot not.
I was replying from the perspective of how this should work in general. I agree that for this to work with a kernel recipe we do need the change that started this thread and that is probably a reasonable thing to do. Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core