On Thu, 2023-06-08 at 09:33 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> At this point, you can probably see why I ended up using the explicit
> variables and overrides versus python when doing the
> meta-virtualization splits. :)
> 
> I have a few more comments that I made in v1, that I haven't seen
> directly handled or replied to.
> 
> My only remaining concern (and it may just be my own concern), is that
> there's no way to change this packaging split. Either you take the
> programatic split, or you take the -all packages.
> 
> Other packages (glibc, kernel-modules) have a variable that controls
> whether the split happens or not, I'd like to see something similar
> here .. but I do realize that it makes test complexity more, and that
> Richard normally doesn't like conditionals like that.

I only "like" conditionals if it is a code path that will be well
travelled, otherwise we tend to find one of the paths is broken. I
don't think we need to make this conditional.

> Alternatively, did we rule out using PACKAGESPLITFUNCS to add the
> splitting routine ? With that, we could remove the processing in
> places we don't want it, in particular for the native/sdk builds, as I
> found that we really don't want the splitting of qemu in those
> scenarios.

FWIW, native isn't packaged so that one at least isn't a problem!

I'm assuming the "all" package can be used in the SDK contexts easily
enough to get the needed behaviour there?

Cheers,

Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#182510): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/182510
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/99401176/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to