On Thu, 2021-03-18 at 13:47 +0100, Ming Liu wrote: > From: Ming Liu <[email protected]> > > There are user cases that a developer wants to add both in-tree and > out-of-tree devicetrees to fitimage, and this is quite normal, for > instance, a developer might need the devicetrees from kernel source > meanwhile maintaining his/her own devicetree overlays to be applied > on top of them. > > To support that, we now allow KERNEL_DEVICETREE and > EXTERNAL_KERNEL_DEVICETREE to be both set in configuration files, and > the devicetrees in EXTERNAL_KERNEL_DEVICETREE have higher priority to > override the same names in KERNEL_DEVICETREE. > > Signed-off-by: Ming Liu <[email protected]> > --- > meta/classes/kernel-fitimage.bbclass | 10 ++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Can we please get some tests added for these code paths? Until we do people are going to continue breaking each other's use cases :( Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#149647): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/149647 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/81427978/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
