On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 10:46 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > 1) Do we rename "task" to something a little more understandable to the > uninitiated, such as "package group"? The word "task" is already used in a > much more natural sense within bitbake as a unit of work. Historically I > believe we picked up this term from Debian but I'm not aware of significant > use > by other mainstream distributions.
Yeah, I think OE inherited it from Familiar, which in turn got it from Debian. But the meaning of the term has drifted slightly through the generations and, as you say, it is no longer a very accurate reflection of what the packages in question are doing. It's never been totally obvious to me that there is much need for tasks/package group recipes as such in oe-core itself; they're rather more of a DISTRO policy thing and their presence in the metadata does obviously have a cost in terms of parse time and memory usage. It might perhaps be worth exploring what they're actually being used for in oe-core and whether those things could be better done in a different way that doesn't involve having a .bb file for them. p. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
