On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 09:09 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 13:29 -0800, Randy Witt wrote: > > > > There are times that the work directories help with the debugging of > > build failures. The logs aren't always enough. So a person might want > > to do something like remove the downloads, but preserve the actual > > work, especially in the case of failures. > > > > > > I'll admit it is a fabricated scenario, but in general I'm against one > > knob requiring the turning of another knob. > > In principle I agree. Okay, let's separate the two.
I hit one snag when starting to do that: the implementation of download removal depends on do_rm_work from rm_work.bbclass for hooking into the build of a recipe at the right place. I can't think of an easy way of avoiding that without duplicating the complex logic from rm_work.bbclass, which itself is currently about to change, so I'd prefer to keep rm_work_and_downloads.bbclass as proposed. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core