> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <openembedded- > [email protected]> On Behalf Of Richard Purdie > Sent: den 3 december 2021 11:07 > To: Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> > Cc: Ross Burton <[email protected]>; OE Core mailing list <openembedded- > [email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 2/2] vim: set PACKAGECONFIG idiomatically > > On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 01:39 -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 2:33 PM Richard Purdie > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 13:45 -0800, Andre McCurdy wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 1:20 PM Ross Burton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 19:32, Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > This isn't equivalent - it will cause a change in behaviour for > anyone > > > > > > using PACKAGECONFIG += "foo" from a .bbappend. > > > > > > > > > > Correct, but this is likely the only recipe in the greater > ecosystem > > > > > which has this behaviour, so I'm not that bothered to be honest. > :) > > > > > > > > The only recipe? There are many recipes which set a default > > > > PACKAGECONFIG with ?= and many which set it with ??=. Your change is > > > > effectively switching the vim recipe from one approach to the other. > > > > The fact that adding PACKAGECONFIG options from a .bbappend with += > > > > sometimes works OK and sometimes not is a source of confusion for > new > > > > users. > > > > > > > > You are right that no one seems to care though... > > > > > > Some of us very much do care, it is actually bothering me a lot and > I've posted > > > several times on the architecture list about this kind of issue. > > > > > > We haven't worked out what we can agree to do about it though :(. > > > > As a first, very easy, step, make a statement here on the mailing list > > that all PACKAGECONFIG defaults should be assigned with ?= instead of > > ??= and fix the recipes in oe-core accordingly. > > The question is whether we all agree on that and I'm not sure we all do.
I definitely agree that using "??=" in the recipe for PACKAGECONFIG is a bad idea. In all our own recipes we use "=" so that is what I would prefer, but "?=" is ok and it would alleviate the need to use PACKAGECONFIG:append in bbappends instead of "PACKAGECONFIG +=". The reason I think "=" is better than "?=" is that if you want to override the PACKAGECONFIG in a bbappend, using "=" a second time will work fine, and if you want to do the override in a configuration file like local.conf, you would use PACKAGECONFIG:pn-foo, which also would override whatever the recipe set using "=". So unless I am missing a use case, there really isn't a need to use "?=". > > As a second step, the parser could generate a warning (or even an > > error) if any variable is assigned to with only ??= and += (the end > > result of that combination is not what any user would expect and I > > doubt if any legitimate use case relies on it). > > Would be interesting to see if there is valid use so it is probably worth > some tests/analysis. The ??= operator never did what I'd hoped it would in > reality sadly. > > Cheers, > > Richard //Peter
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#159117): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/159117 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87406894/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
