On 2015-07-01 09:47, Burton, Ross wrote:
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.
Actually, it *is* using PACKAGECONFIG correctly for some of the settings.
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)
I didn't write this recipe and just wanted to reduce the warnings.
If someone else wants to rework it, that would be great.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas | Consulting for the
MLB Associates | Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
