On Thursday 29 March 2012 15:35:10 Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Thu, 29 Mar 2012, Eric Bénard wrote: > > Le Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:23:20 -0400 (EDT), > > > > "Robert P. J. Day" <rpj...@crashcourse.ca> a écrit : > > > so what is best practise here? > > > > for this one you have an answer on OE's wiki : > > http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/I_want_an_image_with_package_XYZ_installe > > d > > despite the fact that the current reference manual *explicitly* > says this? > > "Using IMAGE_INSTALL with the += operator from the /conf/local.conf > file or from within an image recipe is not recommended as it can cause > ordering issues."
I think what the manual is attempting to mitigate is a situation where you do the following in your image recipe: -------- snip ------- IMAGE_INSTALL += "somepackage1 somepackage2" inherit core-image -------- snip ------- In this instance, because IMAGE_INSTALL is set via ?= within core- image.bbclass, IMAGE_INSTALL will only be set to "somepackage1 somepackage2" since the value is already set by the time it gets to the ?=. This is clearly not what you would want by using +=. Doing the following in an image recipe will work properly however: -------- snip ------- inherit core-image IMAGE_INSTALL += "somepackage1 somepackage2" -------- snip ------- Personally I think the text you quoted from the manual should be adjusted; there's nothing wrong with IMAGE_INSTALL += _in an image recipe_ provided that you do it _after_ the inherit of core-image. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core