> Op 10 nov. 2014, om 08:35 heeft Hongxu Jia <hongxu....@windriver.com> het > volgende geschreven: > > On 11/10/2014 02:42 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >> The docs say that IMAGE_INSTALL is for "package_name". So I think it's >> correct that it fails when you put "recipe_name" in it and sometimes >> there isn't any package with the same name. It's the same as trying to >> make RDEPENDS/DEPENDS entries to be interchangeable (putting >> recipe_names to RDEPENDS and package_names to DEPENDS)." >> >> Especially with that patch for xinput-pointercal, if user explicitly >> asks for installing xinput-pointercal, what's the reason to create him >> completely empty package? IMHO it's only hiding that issue from him and >> instead of discovering the issue in do_rootfs task, he has to check >> generated rootfs or even boot the device. > > For most recipes, they generate packages with recipe name, it is not > convenience to figure out the different between package_name and > recipe_name, especially for newbies, which I means we should reduce > that convenience, build relationship between recipe and package, > especially when the recipe doesn't generate the same name package.
It is not a bug when recipe foo.bb doesn't generate foo.ipk. Your changes introduce needless churn and break upgrade paths only to cater to people making wrong assumptions. -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
