On 1 July 2015 at 15:12, Gary Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > No, it's much better to use the standard mechanism (PACKAGECONFIG) rather > than making up something special for this recipe. The patch is needed only > to suppress warnings about how it's being used. >
I kinda of agree with Robert here - the standard method isn't being used, but the variable is being used. As the chromium recipe doesn't inherit autotools EXTRA_OECONF will only be set by the PACKAGECONFIG handler, so it would be an improvement if the enable/disable arguments were specified as usual in the flags and then EXTRA_OEGYP just included EXTRA_OECONF. (untested but might work, cmake recipes certainly did this) Ross -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
