On 15-03-03 11:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Tue, 3 Mar 2015, Bruce Ashfield wrote:

On 15-03-03 05:39 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Tue, 3 Mar 2015, Robert P. J. Day wrote:


    kernel dev manual uses the KERNEL_FEATURES format of:

       KERNEL_FEATURES += "features/netfilter.scc"

while ref manual variable glossary uses

       KERNEL_FEATURES="features/netfilter"

is there a preference for the usage of the .scc suffix? (i'm assuming
they're both valid, i didn't actually check that. maybe i should check
that ...)

    hang on, i think there's an error in the docs ... if i check the
meta branch, i see that the actual structure for the netfilter feature
is "features/netfilter/netfilter.scc", so "features/netfilter.scc"
shouldn't even work, should it? historical remnant?

It works, but it is an old shortcut that isn't emphasized or used.
So yes, its a historical remnant, and explicit .scc references are
preferred.

   wait ... just to be clear, you're saying that referring to a
features *directory* is a historical remnant? note above that i'm
asking about what appears to be a historical remnant where it looks
like netfilter used to be a .scc file directly under features/, now
it's in a subdirectory.

This format:  KERNEL_FEATURES="features/netfilter"

Is the historical remnant. The tools can convert that to
features/netfilter/netfiler.scc internally. It was a shortcut to
make the features more human readable when they followed that
defined form "<dirname>/<dirname>.scc"


   as it stands now, it would *appear* that the statement:

   KERNEL_FEATURES += "features/netfilter.scc"

is simply wrong and can't possibly work, correct?

That one is wrong, but the tools can also do a basename before
running the test, which converts it to that other format, and
then it can be expanded to find the feature description.

Both are non-obvious, and error prone .. hence why they are not
used anymore.

So the answer is that the docs should be updated to purge the
old references.

Bruce


rday


--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Reply via email to