On Mon, 31 Dec 2012, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2012-12-30 12:44, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > specifically, in cases like this in packagegroup-core-sdk.bb:
> >
> > RDEPENDS_packagegroup-core-sdk
> >
> > could more cleanly be expressed as:
> >
> > RDEPENDS_${PN}
> >
> > could it not? there are quite a few of those unnecessarily verbose
> > constructs, anyone mind if i submit a patch to make that change?
>
> Why stop there? It seems that recipe could use more changes:
> RPROVIDES_packagegroup-core-sdk = "task-core-sdk"
> RREPLACES_packagegroup-core-sdk = "task-core-sdk"
> RCONFLICTS_packagegroup-core-sdk = "task-core-sdk"
>
> RDEPENDS_packagegroup-core-sdk = "\
>
> All of these should use _${PN}
>
> Also, most of the recipes in meta/recipes-core/packagegroups/* could
> use similar changes to make them more readable and maintainable.
good lord, there's a lot of that, such as in packagegroups-base.bb:
PROVIDES = "${PACKAGES}"
PACKAGES = ' \
packagegroup-base \
packagegroup-base-extended \
packagegroup-distro-base \
packagegroup-machine-base \
\
${@base_contains("MACHINE_FEATURES", "acpi",
"packagegroup-base-acpi", "",d)} \
${@base_contains("MACHINE_FEATURES", "alsa",
"packagegroup-base-alsa", "", d)} \
${@base_contains("MACHINE_FEATURES", "apm",
"packagegroup-base-apm", "", d)} \
${@base_contains("MACHINE_FEATURES", "ext2",
"packagegroup-base-ext2", "", d)} \
... and lots more ...
sure, there's a lot of that cleanup that could be done but a few
questions:
1) given how *much* there is, is it worth the non-functional churn?
i'm a big believer in consistency and aesthetics but even *i* would
understand if others didn't want to go down that road.
2) is there a standard for quoting here (single vs double)? i've seen
both variations:
${@base_contains("MACHINE_FEATURES", "acpi", "packagegroup-base-acpi", "",d)}
\
${@base_contains("MACHINE_FEATURES", "alsa", 'packagegroup-base-alsa', "",
d)} \
although i don't think that matters for the eventual expansion of
${PN} inside the quotes
3) as i mentioned before, there are the occasional package defns that
mess up the prettiness, as with packagegroup-base:
PACKAGES = ' \
packagegroup-base \
packagegroup-base-extended \
packagegroup-distro-base \ <-- can't abbreviate obviously
packagegroup-machine-base \
anyway, i'd be willing to do some cleaning for the aesthetic
benefit, but only if others think it's worth it and there's a clear
style guide. it would certainly cut down on the verbosity.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
