On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Maupin, Chase <[email protected]> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chase Maupin [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 3:32 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc: Maupin, Chase
> > Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Fix class OVERRIDES order
> >
> > * Changed the OVERRIDES settings in the classes to use the new
> >   ordering.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chase Maupin <[email protected]>
>
> I was a little unsure of these which is why I put them in a separate patch.
>  Should the virtclass overrides be high or low priority?  Please feel free
> to correct me, but I wanted to make sure that we didn't override "local"


I personally think low is best, otherwise virtclass-native would override,
say, something specific to a certain architecture -- but architecture
specifics still apply to a native recipe, as we are still building for that
architecture.  Others may disagree, though, and I'm certainly open to
alternative views on the subject.
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Reply via email to