On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 15:10 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of Richard
> > Purdie
> > Sent: den 11 november 2022 23:58
> > To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> > Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH] sanity: Drop data finalize call
> >
> > This call was effectively like update_data and no longer did
> > anything
> > in bitbake. Drop it as it is obsolete.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org>
> > ---
> > meta/classes-global/sanity.bbclass | 11 ++---------
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/classes-global/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes-
> > global/sanity.bbclass
> > index 8c7d4d08809..6cb0d6cf882 100644
> > --- a/meta/classes-global/sanity.bbclass
> > +++ b/meta/classes-global/sanity.bbclass
> > @@ -1003,13 +1003,6 @@ def check_sanity(sanity_data):
> > if status.messages != "":
> > raise_sanity_error(sanity_data.expand(status.messages),
> > sanity_data, status.network_error)
> >
> > -# Create a copy of the datastore and finalise it to ensure appends
> > and
> > -# overrides are set - the datastore has yet to be finalised at
> > ConfigParsed
> > -def copy_data(e):
> > - sanity_data = bb.data.createCopy(e.data)
> > - sanity_data.finalize()
> > - return sanity_data
> > -
> > addhandler config_reparse_eventhandler
> > config_reparse_eventhandler[eventmask] = "bb.event.ConfigParsed"
> > python config_reparse_eventhandler() {
> > @@ -1020,13 +1013,13 @@ addhandler check_sanity_eventhandler
> > check_sanity_eventhandler[eventmask] = "bb.event.SanityCheck
> > bb.event.NetworkTest"
> > python check_sanity_eventhandler() {
> > if bb.event.getName(e) == "SanityCheck":
> > - sanity_data = copy_data(e)
> > + sanity_data = bb.data.createCopy(e.data)
>
> For my understanding, wouldn't it be the same to do:
>
> sanity_data = bb.data.createCopy(d)
Yes.
> I found this in the bitbake documentation, which seems to support my
> understanding: A global variable "e" is defined, which represents the
> current event. ... The global datastore is available as "d". In
> legacy
> code, you might see "e.data" used to get the datastore. However,
> realize
> that "e.data" is deprecated and you should use "d" going forward.
e.data is how we used to have to access the datastore in event
contexts. We did add d to allow standardisation and we do want to
remove e.data but haven't cleaned out the old references yet. Arguably
I could/should have here but I was already nesting a few issues deep in
cleanups so I've left that for another time.
> Further, is there any reason to use bb.data.createCopy(d) instead of
> d.createCopy()? AFAICT, the former just calls the latter.
d.createCopy() is indeed the preferred syntax and functionally the
same.
Cheers,
Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#173358):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/173358
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/94970455/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
