On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 16:52 +0100, Björn Stenberg wrote: > Richard Purdie wrote: > > > meta/classes/image.bbclass | 6 ++- > > > meta/classes/packagegroup.bbclass | 2 +- > > > meta/conf/bitbake.conf | 15 ++++++++- > > > > Whilst we're in bootstrapping mode for this work, how about we make > > these changes a "ptest.bbclass" file which we'd inherit in the recipes > > where we've got ptest enabled? > > Having looked into it a bit, I'm not sure I understand how you mean. > > First, I don't quite see how this would be done in an elegant way for > the in-function changes in image.bbclass and packagegroup.bbclass.
Those are pretty non-invasive so I think we can just add these pieces in directly as you have them now. > And the lines added to bitbake.conf were put there because they mirror > other complementary packages like -dbg and -dev. Is it really a good > idea to invent a new way of doing this for -ptest packages? This isn't a "new way". We can easily put these in a .bbclass for now. Pretty much every package has a -dev and -dbg package but for now, the number of packages which will have ptest is limited. Its a waste of build time having the -ptest metadata being processed for every package, its also confusing. So I think my proposal stands, lets put the pieces from bitbake.conf into a bbclass file for now, the other pieces can merge into the core code. As and when we have more than say 60% of the metadata with ptest we can think about making -ptest packages the default. Cheers, Richard > _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
