The typical symlinks are:
* /bin -> usr/bin
* /sbin -> usr/sbin
* /lib -> usr/lib
* /usr/sbin -> bin
It is checked that only sane symlinks are created, so a half-merged /usr
(e.g, merging bin and sbin, but not lib) is feasible as well.
The following options in a distro configuration create a ful
On Sun, 2016-01-03 at 00:53 +0100, Matthias Schiffer wrote:
> +PACKAGECONFIG ??= " \
> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES',
> 'merged-usr','merged-usr', '', d)} \
Why is this DISTRO_FEATURE (or the corresponding PACKAGECONFIG)
required? Surely it ought to suffice to simply
On 01/03/2016 02:01 PM, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-01-03 at 00:53 +0100, Matthias Schiffer wrote:
>> +PACKAGECONFIG ??= " \
>> + ${@bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES',
>> 'merged-usr','merged-usr', '', d)} \
>
> Why is this DISTRO_FEATURE (or the corresponding PACKAGEC
On 1/2/16 5:53 PM, Matthias Schiffer wrote:
> The typical symlinks are:
>
> * /bin -> usr/bin
> * /sbin -> usr/sbin
> * /lib -> usr/lib
> * /usr/sbin -> bin
>
> It is checked that only sane symlinks are created, so a half-merged /usr
> (e.g, merging bin and sbin, but not lib) is feasible as well.
On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 23:38 +0100, Matthias Schiffer wrote:
> Of course, the alternative would be to force such distros to
> override the bases-files recipe in a .bbappend.
I don't think this would be an especially big deal. The whole contents
of base-files is already fairly distro-specific and a
