Thanks a lot for the answers, that's really helpful!
Seems like I should have a closer look at the distros.
I'll need some time to test it, I'll update here when that is done!
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 1:52 PM Bruce Ashfield
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 2:41 AM Josef Holzmayr
> wrote:
> >
>
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 2:41 AM Josef Holzmayr
wrote:
>
> Howdy!
>
> Am 29.06.2021 um 01:28 schrieb Jonas Vautherin:
> > I was thinking about my issue described here [1], and discovered the
> > variables called COMPATIBLE_MACHINE and COMPATIBLE_HOST, which "you can
> > use to stop recipes from
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 8:41 AM Josef Holzmayr
wrote:
>
> Howdy!
>
> Am 29.06.2021 um 01:28 schrieb Jonas Vautherin:
> > I was thinking about my issue described here [1], and discovered the
> > variables called COMPATIBLE_MACHINE and COMPATIBLE_HOST, which "you can
> > use to stop recipes from
Howdy!
Am 29.06.2021 um 01:28 schrieb Jonas Vautherin:
I was thinking about my issue described here [1], and discovered the
variables called COMPATIBLE_MACHINE and COMPATIBLE_HOST, which "you can
use to stop recipes from being built for machines (/hosts) with which
the recipes are not
Hello, instead of creating a new variable (don't sure of its possible
usefulness), you can use BBMASK or review dependencies between your layer
PS: I did a similar answer on your stackoverflow question.
On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 01:29, Jonas Vautherin
wrote:
> I was thinking about my issue
I was thinking about my issue described here [1], and discovered the
variables called COMPATIBLE_MACHINE and COMPATIBLE_HOST, which "you can use
to stop recipes from being built for machines (/hosts) with which the
recipes are not compatible". And so I wondered if it would make sense to
add
