OK, I gave this a try and here is some feedback: 1) bitbake-config-build is way too aggressive in the files it looks for as fragments. My editor (vim) creates hidden temporary files that I kept having to manually delete or the tool would attempt to parse them and fail. I would recommend that it only consider non-hidden files that end in .conf as valid fragments. 2) It would be convenient if `bitbake-config-build enable-fragment` and `bitbake-config-build disable-fragment` could take more than one fragment, as this would make scripting in CI more straight forward. 3) The biggest problem I had with this is that I can't set variables like MACHINE/DISTRO etc. in fragments, I think this is due to how deferred the evaluation of this is. Without being able to do this, I'm not sure how useful this system will be for me (or at least, it won't be able to replace any of the current mechanisms I use). I think what users are generally after here is that they can really easily share a configuration in source control (which this does well), but if it can't control everything it's of limited use.
As a practical example of what I would like to see for this to be useful, consider https://github.com/JPEWdev/oe-doom-demo. In this repo, we are building a demo program for multiple different hardware platforms; In an ideal world, the instructions I could give someone would look like (NOTE: this is fictitious because the repo doesn't work this way today): ``` git clone https://github.com/JPEWdev/oe-doom-demo cd oe-doom-demo ./scripts/setup-layers . core/oe-init-build-env bitbake-config-build enable-fragment doom-demo/le-potato bitbake core-image-doom ``` This specifies all the things required to build the demo for le-potato hardware (including MACHINE/DISTRO/etc.), so they should get the exact same demo image I made when building. On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 9:58 AM Richard Purdie via lists.openembedded.org <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2024-12-11 at 12:24 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 16:27, Richard Purdie > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > If we start going down this path, we might as well write an > > > > interactive curses UI, and keep the command line output 'flat' > > > > like it > > > > is now. I'm also not sure what is the best approach, we'd need to > > > > take > > > > fragments into practical use and accumulate a sizable amount of > > > > them > > > > perhaps. Such things can be easily tweaked from experience. > > > > > > Having experimented with curses UIs, they're a pain and don't > > > really do > > > what you hope/think they would. > > > > We might be thinking of different things: my suggestion is that > > interactive 'kernel menuconfig' type UI is worth exploring for > > fragments (or bitbake-setup, for that matter). > > We were talking about different things. I agree, I think something > kconfig like for some of this would be much appreciated by some users. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#208987): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/208987 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/109647318/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
