On 9 January 2013 12:29, Martin Jansa <martin.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:00:20PM +0200, Marko Lindqvist wrote: >> On 9 January 2013 11:42, Ross Burton <ross.bur...@intel.com> wrote: >> > On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 09:33, Marko Lindqvist wrote: >> >> Exactly, except that it would be provided by bitbake, and not >> >> constructed by each recipe itself - less recipe writing work + you >> >> could count on it to always mean same thing. >> > >> > Everything but the last dot, or the first two components, or what? For >> > anything GNOMEy you want the first two elements as some packages use nano >> > releases for development snapshots (1.2.3.4). >> >> Ok, do we have any counter-examples where you'd want, say, three out >> of four parts? One out of n? Of course there will always be need to >> use variables of their own in some recipes, but I'm after something >> that would be usable in most cases. > > I don't remember where but 1st of 4 is also used. > What about stuff like "1.2.3.4+gitAUTOINC"? > > GNOME is quite consistent, but it still looks better defined in > recipe/bbclass then having "something" defined by bitbake in all recipes > and usable only in some.
Given the examples, yes. Only if external tools would benefit (= could use bitbake defined, but not recipe constructed var), defining it bitbake side would make sense. - ML _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
