Hi, Is there anything wrong with this patch?
Cheers, Andre' On 28 July 2015 at 09:04, <adras...@digisoft.tv> wrote: > From: André Draszik <g...@andred.net> > > See e.g. > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/64067 > > Signed-off-by: André Draszik <g...@andred.net> > --- > documentation/ref-manual/ref-classes.xml | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/documentation/ref-manual/ref-classes.xml > b/documentation/ref-manual/ref-classes.xml > index d482ca0..a9b2f3c 100644 > --- a/documentation/ref-manual/ref-classes.xml > +++ b/documentation/ref-manual/ref-classes.xml > @@ -51,6 +51,22 @@ > that produce executable binaries (such as building the cross-compiler > and a C library as pre-requisites, and splitting out of debug symbols > during packaging). > + <note> > + Unlike e.g. Debian, OpenEmbedded recipes that produce packages > + which > + <link linkend='var-RDEPENDS'><filename>RDEPENDS</filename></link> > + on > + <link > linkend='var-TUNE_PKGARCH'><filename>TUNE_PKGARCH</filename></link> > + packages should never be made <filename>allarch</filename>, even > + if they do not produce architecture-specific output. This would > + cause the do_package_write_* tasks to have different signatures > + for > + <link linkend='var-MACHINE'><filename>MACHINE</filename></link>s > + with different > + <link > linkend='var-TUNE_PKGARCH'><filename>TUNE_PKGARCH</filename></link>, > + thus unnecessary rebuilds every single time an image for a > different > + MACHINE is built (even without any change to the recipe). > + </note> > </para> > > <para> > -- > 2.1.4 > -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
