On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 17:44 +0100, Graeme Gregory wrote: > On 07/04/2011 05:12 PM, Chris Elston wrote: > >> Hi, with my Angstrom cap on I like this syntax and I think it will be > >> really useful. > >> > >> A second level concern I have is about conflicting features, its not > >> something we will come across probably in DISTRO land as we are sensible > >> enough not to select them. But users could select them in local.conf. > >> > >> Graeme > > As a new developer, I've discovered that there are plenty of things that > > you can set in local.conf which break things :D > > > > Could you please give an example of conflicting features that could > > cause problems, I'm not experienced enough with OE to have encountered > > that problem yet. > > > > > Cant think of a solid one off the top of my head, but I mean the cases where > > --enable-feature means that --disable-another-feature is done. > > This is why I listed it as a secondary issue. > > Graeme
I understand. We could capture that information with an optional extra field in the config info something like: PACKAGE_CONFIG[foo] = "--enable-foo, --disable-foo, libfoo, <options which conflict with foo>" And then detect the conflict. It's a trade off of time to handle that conflicts field, versus how many potential conflicts there are I guess. I think we could add it later if it turned out to be a common problem. Cheers, Chris. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
