Koen Kooi <koen-qlwjdigv5ablmq1fohreccpxlwaov...@public.gmane.org>
writes:
> The ??= operator is too weak
> ...
> -PACKAGECONFIG_class-target ??= "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam',
> 'libpam', '', d)} \
> +PACKAGECONFIG_class-target ?= "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam',
> 'pam', '', d)} \
> ${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES',
> 'systemd', 'systemd', '', d)} "
good to see that I am not the only one hitting this problem. But does
there exist some explanation for this behavior? Lots of other packages
have
| PACKAGECONFIG ??=
and it seems to work there. It might be related to the '_class-target'
override but that's a nasty, unpredictable bug causing silent breakage.
Something like
| localconfig = ""
| localconfig_class-target = "${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'pam', 'pam',
'', d)}...
|
| PACKAGECONFIG ??= "${localconfig}"
and forbidding '??' in override-constructs might make things clearer.
Enrico
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
