[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] rm_work.bbclass: inhibit rm_work per recipe
Paul Eggleton
paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com
Tue Mar 26 17:52:00 UTC 2013
On Tuesday 26 March 2013 17:25:52 Phil Blundell wrote:
> This doesn't seem (at the risk of invoking an unintended metaphor)
> entirely black or white. Maybe it should just be "RM_WORK_EXCEPTIONS"
> or something.
"exception" has another meaning to my mind. I've sent out a patch to change it
to RM_WORK_EXCLUDE.
> Of course, you can get the same effect in your distro configuration by
> saying:
>
> RM_WORK = "rm_work"
> RM_WORK_pn-icu-native = ""
> INHERIT += "${RM_WORK}"
>
> so I must admit to being slightly ambivalent about whether the extra
> syntactic sugar is all that valuable.
True, that works; I think having an explicit variable makes it easier to
understand what's going on though and is a little harder to typo and have your
work removed when you didn't want it to be ;)
> And then again you can always use rm_old_work instead. :-)
I'm sure this has come up before, but is rm_old_work something we ought to
have in OE-Core?
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list