On 11/6/24 8:18 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
I think we've had this idea around on occasions before but I'm going to write it down as an official proposal. In the interests of small contained but useful tweaks, I'd like to suggest we add an "include_all" directive. Example usage would be: include_all conf/distro/include/maintainers.inc which would iterate BBPATH and include (in order) each maintainers.inc file it finds. This would be used for things like the maintainers inc files so that other layers could add values to some central list. The clang inc files were another possible use case or the static libs or other inc files we have in core. It would all a few more files bitbake would have to check for the presence of to check cache validation but that is already a complex problem and we have ways to handle this. I did wonder about "require_all" but I doubt we need the difference in semantics for this form of operation and include is good enough.
This may have been covered in another reply, but I could see where include_all AND require_all may be useful. I would set the semantics to:
include_all 0..n files are included that match the name specified in the search path.
require_all 1..n at least ONE file is needed to be included from the search path. I'm not 100% sure we need a 'require_all' though. --Mark
Thoughts? Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#2074): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/2074 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/109425270/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
