On Tuesday 24 July 2012 11:29:26 Martin Jansa wrote:
> > As I mentioned before, the priority currently has no bearing on the order
> > of BBPATH - that is determined by the order in which the layer conf files
> > are parsed and (as you highlight) whether they prepend or append to
> > BBPATH. Rememb
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Paul Eggleton
wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 July 2012 05:04:25 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>> i asked about this not that long ago but i'm still a bit puzzled --
>> what's the best practice for adding new layers in terms of how
>> bblayers.conf and the various layer.conf f
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 July 2012 05:04:25 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
... snip ...
> > with both the yocto and oe-core layer having priority 5. is there no
> > chance of confusion here?
>
> As I mentioned before, the priority currently has no bearing on the
> order
On Tuesday 24 July 2012 10:15:32 Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > but every single meta-openembedded sub-layer uses the *other* form:
> >
> > BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
>
> Again, only as of quite recently
Actually it seems that may not be true. This change was made in May 2011.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul
On Tuesday 24 July 2012 05:04:25 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> i asked about this not that long ago but i'm still a bit puzzled --
> what's the best practice for adding new layers in terms of how
> bblayers.conf and the various layer.conf files are defined?
>
> the default layer.conf for oe-core c
i asked about this not that long ago but i'm still a bit puzzled --
what's the best practice for adding new layers in terms of how
bblayers.conf and the various layer.conf files are defined?
the default layer.conf for oe-core contains:
BBPATH .= ":${LAYERDIR}"
...
BBFILE_PRIORITY_normal = "5
