On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 01:22:58AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 09:33:24PM -0500, Brad Mouring wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:59:55PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > On 06/20/2017 10:53 PM, Brad Mouring wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:43:51PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > >> On 06/20/2017 10:40 PM, Brad Mouring wrote: > > > >>> As implemented currently, the fw-utils recipe does not allow for > > > >>> ... > > > >> > > > >> Do we really need yet another variable ? Wouldn't it make more sense to > > > >> add do_install_append_yourmachine() {} in your meta-whatever to > > > >> u-boot-fw-utils_%.bbappend and install whatever additional files you > > > >> need ? > > > > > > > > This is (kinda) what we were doing, there was some discussion as to > > > > whether or not this made sense upstream. > > > > > > Link? > > > > I know it's not a great answer, but we've not pushed the version of the > > branch where these changes are going in. Eventually, they'll end up in > > this repo: > > > > https://github.com/ni/meta-nilrt > > > > > > I was unsure of the > > > > acceptability of a do_install_append.*() clobbering a file of the > > > > original do_install(). > > > > > > That's probably what really needs to be discussed. > > > > > > We can probably add some task which by default installs the > > > fw_env.config example and can be overridden in meta-whatever . Maybe the > > > others can jump into here and explain how to handle overriding the > > > default config file best. > > > > That sounds like a solution that would certainly work for this > > use-case, if no one pipes up with objections or a currently-unseen > > silver bullet solution, I'll try to whip something together tomorrow > > and post. Thanks for the idea. > > > > Denys, I know you keep pushing the "shove it in a do_install_append()", > > but to me and my under-informed sensibilities, this seems weird and > > unclean to clobber a file in a _append(), would it cause some QA failure? > > Hmm, I mentioned it only once... To a patch that does already mention > appending stuff...
Fair. I thought you'd also mentioned it on irc, but it doesn't really matter. After sleeping on it, I think I've gotten over my distaste for overwriting a file when we're already glomming changes atop the original recipe. I'll just take that approach. Thanks, Brad Mouring -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core