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: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
