On 9/14/22 14:39, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sept 2022 at 07:49, ChenQi <qi.c...@windriver.com> wrote:
I'm reluctant to agree that this is like machine and distro, because
it's a hard requirement that machine and distro definitions be under
some layer, otherwise how can bitbake get info about it? But
TEMPLATECONF seems to be a different case, it could be everywhere
because it's used by the project setup script.
In our case, the TEMPLATECONF is <project_dir>/config/, and layers are
<project_dir>/<layer>/. This directory hierarchy has been working for
years until recent changes.
Do you think such directory hierarchy makes sense? How about we deleting
such check if there's no strong technical reason to do so? By 'strong
technical reason', I mean that some codes in oe-core are written based
on this assumption (this is the part I'm sure about).
Again, it's not about only code. It's about humans too: we benefit
from having things where we expect them to be.
$TEMPLATECONF/bblayers.conf.sample has a list of layers. These layers
may have dependencies on each other or they may not. Which layer do you
think should this TEMPLATECONF locate?
TEMPLATECONF, by its nature, is a project setup variable. It logically
does not belong to any layer.
Why would people expect some project level variable to point to some
directory under a layer?
If your templates are
in meta-layer/conf/templates/ you do not have to document, explain or
support this;
Again, why this meta-layer should have knowledge about the whole
project? It should be the project that has knowledge about layer, not
the other way around.
anyone new to the project will simply pick this up from
prior experience or official documentation.
When users see a file in a layer that refers to other layers which this
layer does not depend on and not been dependent upon, they may ask why.
That said, there is already code that makes this assumption too: both
'bitbake-layers save-template-conf' and upcoming 'oe-setup-build' (the
patch was sent for review here) consider only
meta-layer/conf/templates.
Give it a second thought.
I have to ask the same question to you: is there a strong technical
reason that you cannot move the templates to the new standard
location?
Yes. The bblayers.conf.sample is generated dynamically according to
project setup.
That said, I could of course create a useless layer that does nothing
but only holds these sample files to satisfy this sanity check. But I do
think this sanity check is logically wrong.
Again, project contains layers, project setup could choose to use layers
the project wants. Forcing a project level variable to point to a
location under a layer is not reasonable.
Regards,
Qi
Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#170638):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/170638
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/93368468/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
