Graeme Gregory wrote: > On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 11:09:10PM +0100, Rolf Leggewie wrote: >> XorA "solved" this in a hackish way with angsstrom.bbclass. >> > No he didnt and no its not a hack.
He didn't? On August 15th last year somebody in #oe with the nick XorA|gone claimed he did. http://www.hentges.net/irclogs/%23oe/2009/August/20090815_oe.log?lines=500#[20090815%2015:29:59] <XorA|gone>: it is in the end why I wrote the generic blacklist code and the following sounded rather hackish to me <XorA|gone>: beware it gives a crazy python dump if you use it in combo with bitbake -b [...] <Laibsch>: OK, so not yet ready to be turned by default, he? <XorA|gone>: Laibsch: any call to skippackage with bitbake -b does that <XorA|gone>: Laibsch: as you rip out the recipe under bitbakes nose As I said during that IRC chat I am of the opinion that OE needs a way to specify tuples of for example PN/PV/DISTRO/MACHINE and maybe even the version of gcc/binutils used that bitbake should not consider in the task queue. If the approach taken by angstrom.bbclass provides a proper solution here it should be turned on by default. Comments welcome. If we had something like this in place I see a chance to resurrect "bitbake world" and that would help a lot with QA (not saying that everybody needs to build world all the time, but it would provide a good test). _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
