On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 14:58 +0100, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: > So, here I am now. I do not know who else use the > do_make_scripts() function from module-base.bbclass and in what > way, and whether restructuring the functionality into the new > kernel-scripts.bbclass without maintaining backwards > compatibility would be a problem. If you know anything about > this, please let me know.
I'm not entirely clear why you couldn't maintain compatibility by moving the task in question to a new class but keeping its name the same (i.e. refrain from renaming "do_make_scripts" to "do_kernel_scripts") and having module-base.bbclass simply inherit the newly-added class. That seems like it ought to be fairly straightforward and uncontroversial. That said, though, I don't think there is any pressing need to maintain backwards compatibility around module-base.bbclass. In fact, I think it would probably be fine for module-base.bbclass to simply go away altogether and have its functionality subsumed into module.bbclass; the split between those two classes is mostly a relic of yesteryear and I can't think of any good purpose that it serves nowadays. So I would be happy enough to see that (and the tangly mess that is the kernel classes in general) cleaned up irrespective of what happens with do_make_scripts. p. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
