On Thu, 2024-05-16 at 09:18 +0200, Martin Hundebøll wrote: > On Wed, 2024-05-15 at 12:56 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > diff --git a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf > > index b2c500d8739..75c850760f6 100644 > > --- a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf > > +++ b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf > > @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ STAMP = > > "${STAMPS_DIR}/${MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS}/${PN}/${PV}" > > STAMPCLEAN = "${STAMPS_DIR}/${MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS}/${PN}/*-*" > > BASE_WORKDIR ?= "${TMPDIR}/work" > > WORKDIR = "${BASE_WORKDIR}/${MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS}/${PN}/${PV}" > > -UNPACKDIR ??= "${WORKDIR}" > > +UNPACKDIR ??= "${WORKDIR}/sources-unpack" > > T = "${WORKDIR}/temp" > > D = "${WORKDIR}/image" > > S = "${WORKDIR}/${BP}" > > Why not use > > UNPACKDIR ??= "${WORKDIR}/sources" > > like it's done in the individual recipes?
I think it is helpful for users to be able to tell the difference between a recipe where S is a subdirectory of this and when there is no subdirectory. I therefore left them visually different. > And shouldn't we do > > S = ?? "${UNPACKDIR}/${BP}" > > also? See my other emails. I'm torn on changing this. I've been hoping we could avoid extra directory levels, the extra pain of changing S everywhere and there is also some benefit to keeping extra unpacked files clearly separate from the other sources. We may end up doing it, I don't know. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#199444): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/199444 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/106112374/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-