Hi Paul, On Thu, 2015-06-04 at 14:49 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Thursday 04 June 2015 16:12:07 Markus Lehtonen wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 19:01 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > > On Thursday 30 April 2015 12:16:06 Markus Lehtonen wrote: > > > > This patchset tries to improve handling of local source files (i.e. > > > > file:// > > > > in SRC_URI). First, it improves packages for which S=WORKDIR (that > > > > possibly > > > > only have local sources. Second, it makes local sources available in the > > > > srctree for all packages. > > > > > > > > See yocto bug #7602 > > > > > > I've finally looked at these, apologies for the delay. Some comments: > > > > > > * I don't think we really want the local files to become part of the git > > > repository by default - they shouldn't be committed. Once users have > > > finished with devtool, we want them to be able to push the source tree to > > > their own repo and point to that within the recipe, whilst keeping the > > > local files next to the recipe. > > > > So you suggest to add a new command line option to devtool extract and > > modify (--local-files or smth)? What to do when there are only local > > files (no source tarball / repo) - automatically enable --local-files in > > this case? > > Is another option really required? Unless I'm missing something, I would have > thought the behaviour for local files ought to be the same regardless of > whether they are in addition to the upstream source, or the only files in > SRC_URI.
Currently, the local files are already committed into Git in some cases (i.e. basically when S==WORKDIR, e.g. with makedevs). What would you suggest to do with the local files? Copy the files to git repo worktree but add them to .git/info/exclude? Or not copy them at all? In this case some packages would not be supported anymore (e.g. the makedevs mentioned before). I agree that the behavior should be consistent and the same regardless of the existence of upstream sources. > > > * This implies that new files added to the local files dir when we do > > > devtool update-recipe should not be added as a patch, they should be > > > copied next to the recipe and added to SRC_URI. I'm more than happy for > > > us to implement this separately as a follow-up (i.e. we could start by > > > not handling adding files to the local files directory at all.) > > > > Yeah, I actually have this WIP. Currently (i.e. with the current > > patchset), new files added to 'local-files' are just ignored. They are > > not copied and no patches is generated out of these. > > OK, then it sounds like the behaviour for added files is reasonable for the > moment and we can extend it as a follow-up. OK, thanks. > > > * The local-files directory needs to be named specific to OE - > > > "oe-local-files" would be ideal. If we could have one place in the code > > > where this was defined that would be ideal as well (maybe at some point > > > we'd allow it to be configured). > > > > This is not a big deal. Should it perhaps be "bb-local-files" instead? > > Well strictly speaking all of this is being defined in OE, not bitbake, hence > my suggestion of "oe-local-files". OK, "oe-local-files" is probably fine. I was just thinking about Poky or some other derived project where the files might not be from OE. Thanks, Markus -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
