Re: [OE-core][mickledore 26/26] image-artifact-names: include ${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} directly in both ${IMAGE_NAME} and ${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}

On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 11:23 PM Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 10:38 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > This isn't backwards compatible and various BSP might need small > > adjustment to work correctly with this. > > > > Please don't backport this one. > > Agreed and 25/26 probably i

Re: [OE-core][mickledore 26/26] image-artifact-names: include ${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} directly in both ${IMAGE_NAME} and ${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}

On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 10:38 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > This isn't backwards compatible and various BSP might need small > adjustment to work correctly with this. > > Please don't backport this one. Agreed and 25/26 probably isn't needed either. Cheers, Richard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links:

Re: [OE-core][mickledore 26/26] image-artifact-names: include ${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} directly in both ${IMAGE_NAME} and ${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}

This isn't backwards compatible and various BSP might need small adjustment to work correctly with this. Please don't backport this one. On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 12:34 AM Steve Sakoman wrote: > From: Martin Jansa > > * ${IMAGE_NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} is almost always used together already >

[OE-core][mickledore 26/26] image-artifact-names: include ${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} directly in both ${IMAGE_NAME} and ${IMAGE_LINK_NAME}

From: Martin Jansa * ${IMAGE_NAME}${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} is almost always used together already and when they aren't it's usually because of hardcoded '.rootfs' suffix * it's a bit strange, because ${IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX} is applied after the version from ${IMAGE_VERSION_SUFFIX}, if we move it to