> -----Original Message----- > From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > [mailto:openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of > Khem Raj > Sent: den 10 december 2016 22:16 > To: Robert P. J. Day > Cc: OE Core mailing list > Subject: Re: [OE-core] can "IMAGE_INSTALL ?= ..." not be written in a > more obvious way? > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 3:40 AM, Robert P. J. Day > <rpj...@crashcourse.ca> wrote: > > > > i've nattered about this before but not sure i ever got an answer -- > > here's the last bit of core-image.bbclass: > > > > CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL = '\ > > packagegroup-core-boot \ > > packagegroup-base-extended \ > > \ > > ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \ > > ' > > > > CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?= "" > > > > IMAGE_INSTALL ?= "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL}" > > > > the first time i saw that (long ago), it took me a few looks to figure > > out what was happening. can this not be written in a more obvious way: > > > > CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL = '\ > > packagegroup-core-boot \ > > packagegroup-base-extended \ > > ' > > > > CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL ?= "" > > > > IMAGE_INSTALL ?= " \ > > ${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} \ > > ${CORE_IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL} \ > > " > > > > is that not equivalent, or am i missing something? it's certainly > > clearer as to what's happening if people are perusing the code. > > They are same AFAICT, dont feel strongly about readability but feel > free to send a patch
Careful now. Changing these can affect image recipes outside of OE-core. If one has an image recipe that inherits core-image and then defines IMAGE_INSTALL = "${CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL} my-own-packages ..." then changing CORE_IMAGE_BASE_INSTALL as per above would suddenly cause that image to miss including packages that it previously did. I recommend leaving it as is. //Peter -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core