[poky] [OE-core] [PATCH 3/3] meta-yocto: add pieces removed from oe-core for beagleboard & atom-pc

[Koen Kooi]

Op 5 mei 2011, om 14:21 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven:

> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 13:46 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Op 5 mei 2011, om 13:38 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven:
>> 
>>> Hi Paul,
>>> 
>>> Great work in doing this, thanks. I was just looking at it with a view
>>> to making machine support cleaner and I think there are still things we
>>> can likely to do help with this. As one example:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 15:51 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>>> +++ b/meta-yocto/recipes-qt/qt4/qt4-x11-free_4.6.3.bbappend
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
>>>> +QT_GLFLAGS_atom-pc = "-opengl"
>>>> +
>>>> diff --git a/meta-yocto/recipes-qt/qt4/qt4-x11-free_4.7.2.bbappend b/meta-yocto/recipes-qt/qt4/qt4-x11-free_4.7.2.bbappend
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..076ade2
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/meta-yocto/recipes-qt/qt4/qt4-x11-free_4.7.2.bbappend
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
>>>> +QT_GLFLAGS_atom-pc = "-opengl"
>>> 
>>> could we set QT_GLFLAGS in the machine.conf file instead of using a
>>> bbappend?
>> 
>> Putting such USEFLAGS in machines sounds like a bad idea. In this case
>> enabling it globally and falling back to mesa sw rendering at runtime
>> is a better idea. The GL flag only enables extra API and libs, so it's
>> good to have.
> 
> Agreed, longer term I think this is going to be the better way to handle
> this. In this day and age, defaulting to sw rendering is probably the
> sane thing to do.

Something like SOC_FAMILY would help here.

> Equally, moving this from a .bbappend to the machine file is a bit
> cleaner too though :)

Is it? Do you really want the machine to know about all the knobs in all the different layers? The .bbappends clearly signals a change to the recipe, hiding it in the machine.conf will just confuse people. And when changing options you need to edit the machine and then use PR_INC in a different file. Using a bbappend limits that to a single file