Op 14 nov. 2011, om 21:39 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 20:17 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote: >> Op 14 nov. 2011, om 19:54 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven: >> >>> Most people building distcc will not need the distccmon-gnome GUI to be >>> built, so make it optional via the new PACKAGECONFIG functionality and >>> default it to disabled. (This also removes the need to disable it for >>> uclibc.) >>> >>> Part of the fix for [YOCTO #1690]. >> >> I think splitting distccmon-gnome into a seperate recipe is a better idea. > > I think that makes sense in some cases but I'd hate for it to become the > default approach for issues like this as the duplication of code, > parsing and build time etc. grate on me. Do we really need separate > recipes?
I think for this case, yes. And I'll happily trade needing extra buildtime for not needing USEFLAGS. > > I'll probably take this patch as it improves the situation IMO (and is > easy to change the configuration from a distro config if anyone does > have an issue with it being disabled). This patch changes the default behaviour in a way that distros need to update their configs in order to keep the status quo. I know I use distccmon-gnome on my boards, but will I remember 2 months from now that this patch went in? I asked this before in a different context, but I'll ask again: do you expect distro maintainers to vet each and every commit that goes into OE-core to find out when default got (silently) changed? USEFLAGS should be a last resort when having seperate recipes doesn't work out, not a default cure. regards, Koen _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core