On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:59 AM Richard Purdie <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-06-12 at 09:15 +0100, Alex Kiernan wrote: > > Since UBOOT_DTB_BINARY empty means we don't need to inject signatures > > into the U-Boot DTB, we can remove the dependencies between consumers > > of > > these two classes and resolve a circular dependency between u-boot > > and > > kernel. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alex Kiernan <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > meta/classes/kernel-fitimage.bbclass | 2 +- > > meta/classes/uboot-sign.bbclass | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > Really wish we had tests and documentation for these classes... >
I know... I have a dread anytime anyone touches it, me included... I sat on this change for a couple of weeks too. The truth is the pair of them are fragile and hopelessly intertwined, but without tests they're never going to get rewritten, so I might try and take some of that on (or get someone here to do it) as I still have multiple issues with them - signing doesn't really work the way I want, I still have a circular dependency I've not tracked down, doubtless other things I can't immediately bring to mind. If we were to add some tests around it, what would you pull out as the simplest thing that it could do which would be valuable? -- Alex Kiernan -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
