On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Andrei Gherzan <and...@gherzan.ro> wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Bruce Ashfield < >> bruce.ashfi...@windriver.com> wrote: >> >>> Already discussed with Khem and Richard in the original >>> thread. >>> >>> I'm sending another patch shortly to back this off to a note/warning. >>> >>> >> That is nice but wouldn't that clutter the build logs for no reason? For >> people who don't take advantage of scc definitions that is. Could you point >> me to the initial discussion? Just want to understand and maybe vote to >> remove it altogether. >> > > It's a yocto bug. We need to flag BSP definitions that aren't valid, > otherwise the tools > will end up building things like qemuarm for someone that has a > misconfigured BSP. > > If you don't have a defconfig (as someone won't have if they are using a > fully defined > BSP, but with the wrong name) and the wrong entry point, or no entry > point, is returned > we have to flag it. > > The actual bug is: 11878, and there's a related fallout of that bad > definition. > > So no, it won't be deleted, but I will make it check for a few more > parameters before > erroring or logging. > That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. I'll keep an eye on the ml for the fix. -- Andrei Gherzan
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
