2010/7/16 Richard Purdie <rpur...@rpsys.net> > On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 11:46 -0400, Michael Smith wrote: > > Richard Purdie wrote: > > > The idea is that if bitbake finds any X.bbappend files, when it loads > > > X.bb, it will also include these files after it parses the base .bb > file > > > (but before finalise and the anonymous methods run). This means that > > > the .bbappend file can poke around and do whatever it might want to the > > > recipe to customise it. > > > > Does this do anything different than amendrecipes.bbclass? > > Several people have mentioned the amend bbclass. This implements > something very similar in quite a different way as part of the bitbake > tool itself. There are advantages and disadvantages to doing this. > > The features I liked about the bbappend approach was the small amount of > code change required to bitbake compared to the functionality it offers > and also the overhead of the bbappend code is minimal. > > I also feel the bbappend format is slightly easier for users to > comprehend but that is subjective. > > A downside is that the .bbappend applies to specific versions, not all > versions as amend.bbclass can be setup. There are ways that could be > changed. > > The amend class has a greater degree of flexibility in that you can make > changes to the class and it could be argued not changing the core is an > advantage too. > > Cheers, > > Richard,
Looks like a fine idea to me (although I must say I was unaware of the amend class, so I cannot really compare). An alternative I was thinking of was to have a mechanism in an overlayed recipe that would allow you to include whatever version was in a lower priority overlay, but your prososal looks also quite sound. +1 Frans _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel