On 02/05/2014 13:56, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:24 AM, Alex J Lennon > <[email protected]> wrote: > ... >> So I guess I'm at the point where I'm wondering if a getVar() with a >> flag is behaving as you would expect it to, >> or how I might go about ensuring either UBOOT_MACHINE or UBOOT_CONFIG >> isn't defined? >> >> Thanks in advance for any advice, > I think we have a simple error error. You are mixing a recipe, which > is old and a metadata layer with new concepts. > > The u-boot-imx, in 2009.08 recipe, used to set the UBOOT_MACHINE in > the recipe as it was left as a fallback in case user needed it and the > value was different from newer releases. > > In your case, the easier is to make a new yourmachine.conf and use the > UBOOT_CONFIG or UBOOT_MACHINE setting there so it will work just fine. >
If I have to do that, then I have to do that. However if I could just undefine one of the two variables defined in the meta-fsl-arm layer then I could continue with what I am doing without having to spend the time right now to rework the configuration, which is wasted effort for me, as I will be moving up to the new version of u-boot in the near future. Is there no simple way to undefine a variable in a recipe? Thanks, Alex -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
