On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 6:54 PM Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 2023-04-19 at 23:34 +0100, Jose Quaresma wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Not related with the previous discussion but just for > > your information. > > The rm_work.bbclass has an exception for the kernel recipes [1]. > > So I don't understand why we can't do the same for the make-mod- > > scripts > > who is the twin brother of all these kernel recipes. > > > > [1] > > https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/tree/meta/classes/rm_work.bbclass#n168 > > Ideally we wouldn't be doing this for the kernel recipes. > > There is also a big difference to that and the proposed patch. The > proposed patch was preserving a specific directory rather than an > entire recipe. Removing the task stamps but leaving a small piece of > WORKDIR is quite different to preserving WORKDIR and STAMPS for a > specific recipe. The former is not tested and will break things. The > latter is better tolerated by bitbake.
Agreed. Plus, I am working on this now. I have static linking of the scripts/tools working, but what I haven't figured out is how to do that without patching the Makefiles. Next up will be some rpath trickery. Bruce > > So yes, we could do the same. I'm sure there will be other recipes > people want to preserve for other reasons. Where do we draw the line? > We could preserve everything and drop rm_work, then we wouldn't have > these problems? :) > > Cheers, > > Richard -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#180233): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/180233 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/98296212/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
