On Mon, 23 Feb 2015, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Sunday 22 February 2015 15:25:07 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=4eb3db9a2ca8eaff64b64
> > > b8f56dac25d4734571c
> > >
> > > http://git.yoctoproject.org/
On Sunday 22 February 2015 15:25:07 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=4eb3db9a2ca8eaff64b64
> > b8f56dac25d4734571c
> >
> > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=cf72ede74d35746a10d07
> > 089
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=4eb3db9a2ca8eaff64b64b8f56dac25d4734571c
>
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=cf72ede74d35746a10d0708942287548f9c72f30
>
> and some of the surrounding patches. I'd assumed base-fil
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=4eb3db9a2ca8eaff64b64b8f56dac25d4734571c
>
> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=cf72ede74d35746a10d0708942287548f9c72f30
>
> and some of the surrounding patches. I'd assumed base-fil
On Sun, 2015-02-22 at 03:35 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2015-02-21 at 05:09 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
>
> > > sticking with those non-patch files, it makes sense that all of
> > > them should be processed relat
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-02-21 at 05:09 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
... snip ...
> > sticking with those non-patch files, it makes sense that all of
> > them should be processed relative to their location in ${WORKDIR}
> > (which is where they've all been co
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-02-21 at 05:09 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > p.s. i also notice that a small number of OE recipes contain the
> > apparently redundant setting:
> >
> > $ grep -r "^S = \"\${WORKDIR}/\${BP}\"" *
> > meta/recipes-extended/texinfo/texinf
i'll finalize all this a bit at a time ... thanks for your time in
clearing all this up.
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-02-21 at 05:09 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > which makes sense since gcc is a special case -- in short, for any
> > kind of "normal" recipe, t
On Sat, 2015-02-21 at 05:09 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> which makes sense since gcc is a special case -- in short, for any
> kind of "normal" recipe, there is no compelling reason to ever mess
> with the WORKDIR variable, is there?
You'd probably break things if you did.
> next, S, and its
some admittedly simple questions about the WORKDIR layout to make
sure i understand it *completely* as the basis for further questions.
(if all of this is documented in an OE or YP manual somewhere, that'd
be great.)
from bitbake.conf, i can see the default setting for a recipe's
WORKDIR:
BA
10 matches
Mail list logo
