Re: [PATCH] template: Make templates passthrough

[Anton Mikanovich <amikan@ilbers.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2612 bytes --]

15.11.2021 18:57, Henning Schild wrote:
> Does that removal have any side-effects on ... say the fetch task?
> If not .. i guess toggeling that KEEP from 0 to 1 would result in "no
> such file"

Task do_transform_template depends on do_fetch, rebuild after template 
change scenarios works.
Can you give an example of any case where "No such file" issue can happen?

>> There is no need to store original template files after the conversion
>> in real scenarios. To make working folder little cleaner we can remove
>> them. This can be disabled with TEMPLATE_FILES_KEEP variable.
> i do not buy the argument and would keep it the way it is ... reject
> that patch, but maybe i do not yet get the full picture.
> Not the whole patch ... the bits in the custom linux could be valid ...
> always keep as with all other templates, unless it makes debian unhappy.
>
Yes, looks like you don't get the picture.
If talking about templates removing in linux-custom, we just move it to 
bbclass to not mention rm in any recipe needed clean sources.

>
>> Moreover output file should have exactly the same flags as input one,
>> which is usefull for the cases like debian/rules or other executables.
>> So we should copy this part of metadata after the conversion.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anton Mikanovich <amikan@ilbers.de>
>> ---
>>   meta/classes/template.bbclass              | 7 ++++++-
>>   meta/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-custom.inc | 3 ---
>>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/classes/template.bbclass
>> b/meta/classes/template.bbclass index fb9d1186..f5760e15 100644
>> --- a/meta/classes/template.bbclass
>> +++ b/meta/classes/template.bbclass
>> @@ -4,11 +4,12 @@
>>   # SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
>>   
>>   TEMPLATE_FILES ?= ""
>> +TEMPLATE_FILES_KEEP ?= "0"
> Why offer a way at all? And if we do not default to 1, do we need a
> changelog entry?
>
> All in all i think we can keep the files ... always. It is not like
> they add a lot of overhead or confusion. And nobody would delete c
> files in a Makefile after the .o s are created ...
>
> regards,
> Henning

This will not change any recipe API.

I've kept TEMPLATE_FILES_KEEP mostly for debugging. Can't think of any 
real usage of keeping templates inside work dir after the build finish.
We do not delete them from the sources, so it can't be compared with 
removing .c after .o generation.

-- 
Anton Mikanovich
Promwad Ltd.
External service provider of ilbers GmbH
Maria-Merian-Str. 8
85521 Ottobrunn, Germany
+49 (89) 122 67 24-0
Commercial register Munich, HRB 214197
General Manager: Baurzhan Ismagulov


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4147 bytes --]