On 07/12/2016 21:52, Karl Palsson wrote:
>
> Rafał Miłecki <zaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 7 December 2016 at 16:44, Karl Palsson <ka...@tweak.net.au>
>> wrote:
>>> How is this different from just reverting the commit that stopped
>>> this from working? I'm all for this, don't get me wrong, but if a
>>> package can just explicitly define a file as "this overwrites
>>> whatever" how is that any different from before?
>>
>> This new solution doesn't depend on the order of
>> adding/installing packages and we have actually some control
>> which package overwrites files.
>>
> re order: how? You've still got to collect all the packages with
> this special define and run them right? You're still going to get
> conflicts one way or the other.
>
> re control: how? How is this:
>
> ```Your new way
> package/blah/overlay
> $(CP) wop /etc/somewhere
> endef
>
> any different from this
>
> ```The old way that was removed
> package/blah/install
> $(CP) wop /etc/somewhere
> endef
> ```
>
> Cheers,
> Karl P
this patch adds the possibility to do so during rootfs generation. it is
also not a side effect of how opkg works but an explicit feature. it can
further be extended to work with PER_DEVICE_ROOTFS.
John
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
