Per some usability assessment and offline discussion, one of the useful use cases of config fragments is that they allow the "default" configuration for some device to be committed to source control and easily selected and used by the end users. However, when doing this, there is still the desire that the user can "override" the provided fragments for their local builds in local.conf
As a practical example, the configuration for a product can be capture as a config fragment, and an empty local.conf will reproduce the standard build for the product. If the user wants to make "tweaks" to the standard build, they can do so in local.conf As such, move the config fragments to be loaded before local.conf Signed-off-by: Joshua Watt <[email protected]> --- meta/conf/bitbake.conf | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf index 8b607088c6e..d0154044f5a 100644 --- a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf +++ b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf @@ -826,12 +826,13 @@ FILESOVERRIDES = "${TRANSLATED_TARGET_ARCH}:${MACHINEOVERRIDES}:${DISTROOVERRIDE require conf/abi_version.conf include conf/site.conf include conf/auto.conf -include conf/local.conf OE_FRAGMENTS_PREFIX ?= "conf/fragments" OE_FRAGMENTS_METADATA_VARS ?= "BB_CONF_FRAGMENT_SUMMARY BB_CONF_FRAGMENT_DESCRIPTION" addfragments ${OE_FRAGMENTS_PREFIX} OE_FRAGMENTS OE_FRAGMENTS_METADATA_VARS +include conf/local.conf + require ${@"conf/multiconfig/${BB_CURRENT_MC}.conf" if "${BB_CURRENT_MC}" != "" else ""} include conf/machine/${MACHINE}.conf include conf/machine-sdk/${SDKMACHINE}.conf -- 2.47.1
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#210875): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/210875 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/111021218/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
