On 12/11/2012 10:07 AM, Joshua Brindle wrote: > rpcraig wrote: >> On 12/11/2012 08:14 AM, Joshua Brindle wrote: >>> rpcraig wrote: >>>> On 12/11/2012 07:35 AM, Joshua Brindle wrote: >>>>> I understand that, but it doesn't answer my question :X >>>>> >>> <snip> >>>> Independent of the SEPOLICY vars issue, how are you maintaining it? >>> I have customer1_maguro.mk and customer2_maguro.mk in the maguro repo. >>> That lets me have different PRODUCT_PACKAGES and PRODUCT_COPY_FILES >>> variables. The advantages are: >>> >>> 1) only 1 repo to rebase when upstream changes, instead of 1 per >>> customer. >>> 2) don't have to constantly go around and fix vendor/* generated files >>> which explicitly check for PRODUCT=maguro or toro. >>> 3) don't have to reproduce changes I make to any maguro repo that is >>> not specific to the product in question. >>> 4) device repos aren't small, because they often have binary blobs and >>> git doesn't handle that well, having many more will make syncing and >>> storing worse. >>> >>> At least, that is what I was doing until I was forced to have >>> different policies. >> >> In device/samsung/manta/BoardConfig.mk wouldn't you just define your >> BOARD_SEPOLICY_* vars after the include for the >> device/samsung/tuna/BoardConfig.mk file. Thereby overriding the ones set >> in tuna. Then just use if-else makefile logic to build those SEPOLICY >> vars specific to your customer needs. > > I found this discussion. I suppose I could do that but JBQ warned > against it: > > <http://grokbase.com/t/gg/android-building/126spn6jc2/can-i-set-the-values-of-board-or-target-in-device-mk-or-product-mk-instead-of-boardconfig-mk> >
Seems like he just warned against setting those values in the device.mk files, not BoardConfig.mk files. -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the seandroid-list mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to [email protected] with the words "unsubscribe seandroid-list" without quotes as the message.
