On Wednesday 28 November 2012 08:55:59 Robert P. J. Day wrote: > and to finalize the confusion, there's this from > meta/classes/image.bbclass: > > # IMAGE_FEATURES may contain any available package group > > which would appear to be untrue at this point.
I'm pretty sure this has never been true. We should just remove that comment. > i think a better way to approach this would be to discuss the possible types > of entries you might find in IMAGE_FEATURES, which appear to be: > > * actual package groups > * individual recipes(?) I don't think this is the way to explain it. They can be values defined as PACKAGE_GROUP_valuename (in which you can specify one or more packages to be installed when the feature is enabled - where the packages could be any kind of runtime package including packagegroups). The term "recipe" should be avoided here. > * values processed totally independently by other recipes that are > neither package groups nor recipes (eg, "read-only-rootfs") True. FWIW, this aspect is along the same lines as how DISTRO_FEATURES, MACHINE_FEATURES etc. are handled - we check for values contained in them in the places in the metadata where we need to be conditional upon those values. 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
