On Thursday 26 February 2015 04:12:33 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Joe MacDonald wrote:
> > [[yocto] kernel manual: confusing coverage of FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend] On
15.02.25 (Wed 03:54) Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > minor quibble about kernel dev manual -- section 2.2.1, "creating
> > >
> > > the append file", uses the example of:
> > > FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}:"
> > >
> > > while section 2.2.3 uses:
> > > FILESEXTRAPATHS_prepend := "${THISDIR}/files:"
> > >
> > > both sections kind of implying that that's the way to do it, without
> > > making it clear that *either* way works as long as the variable
> > > prepend matches up with the directory name.
> > >
> > > both ways are correct, of course, but the wording is a bit
> > >
> > > confusing.
> >
> > It's probably worth changing the latter reference to match the
> > former. Both work but with any new recipes (at least in the layers I
> > maintain) the preference is to use the former for clarity as well as
> > faster lookups.
>
> sort of related to this, but in a *regular* recipe (not a bbappend),
> the default FILESPATH is set in base.bbclass:
>
> FILESPATH = "${@base_set_filespath(["${FILE_DIRNAME}/${BP}",
> "${FILE_DIRNAME}/${BPN}", "${FILE_DIRNAME}/files"], d)}"
>
> so that, by default, a regular recipe will look for SRC_URI entries in
> *all* of:
>
> 1) ${BP}/
> 2) ${BPN}/
> 3) "files/"
>
> it's not clear which is the preferred standard (not sure there even
> *is* a preferred standard), but in cases where more than one of the
> above exists, all of the relevant directories will be searched, but
> it's not clear why some recipes insist on breaking up the files over
> more than one directory.
>
> in the case of subversion, i can see the logic:
>
> subversion/
> subversion_1.6.15.bb
> subversion-1.8.11/
> subversion_1.8.11.bb
>
> so that the generic "subversion/" directory will apply to *all*
> subversion recipes, but there is also the version-specific
> "subversion-1.8.11/", so that's fine.
>
> busybox, though:
>
> busybox/
> busybox_1.23.1.bb
> busybox_git.bb
> busybox.inc
> files/
>
> won't both directories busybox/ and files/ always be consulted for
> SRC_URI entries, regardless of the version of busybox? so what is the
> rationale for breaking those files over two directories?
>
> and i'm curious ... is there any recipe that contains all *three*
> types of SRC_URI subdirectories?
Our policy in OE-Core (and the layers under meta-openembedded) is to move away
from files/ to ${BPN} for a bit of consistency - if you use ${BPN} it then
doesn't matter if you have more than one recipe in a directory, the files for
each recipe are still kept separate instead of a files/ directory with a
mixture of files for different recipes. ${BP} would only be used for patches
that are specific to a version where multiple versioned recipes are being
provided, leading to multiple versions of the same files needing to be present.
We have been doing the "conversion" on a piecemeal basis on recipe upgrade
however so that's why you will see files/ still in various places. To avoid
undue churn I don't think it would be worth doing a mass rename, and it's also
unlikely that we will be taking away the ability to use files/ by default, so
other layers are free to do as they wish.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
