Re: Why does Isar build multiple configs in one OUTDIR?

[Baurzhan Ismagulov <ibr@radix50.net>]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 03:52:37PM +0200, Henning Schild wrote:
> > Industry Control Hub Workshop Edition is armhf and uses jessie.
> > Industry Control Hub Plant Edition is armhf and uses wheezy.
> > They share the same user-space application.
> 
> So two complete rootfs s that share one application? And they probably
> only share the source and recipe to build it.
> I still do not see where these two share any (intermediate) build
> results, sorry.

ICH Plant Edition contains multiple cards that are armhf, use wheezy but have
different user-space applications. They share the same buildchroot.


> > If we returned to the pre-multiconfig way of having separate build
> > dirs, automating building all products in the repo would require
> > gluing those two steps together. How? Shell with sed patching of
> > local.conf? 
> 
> Bitbake Layering. Maybe combined with git submodules or kas.

Maybe? Please specify how you suggest to build images for ICH WE and PE.

The fact is, the products are already layered and split in different git repos.
Apart from the fact that Isar predates kas and solves the problem well: I'd use
kas for cloning disparate repos (like the repo tool in Android), not for build
dir management.


> > What for?
> 
> Simplicity, Elegance, Maintainability, Modularity ... ty

After you specify your image building solution, please show how yours is better
in these regards.

If you need only one arch + suite combination, you may still use local.conf
without multiconfig.

And if you like, you may still layout your product to your taste and use your
preferred solution with stock Isar. What is exactly the problem you are trying
to address? Multiconfig doesn't take anything away from you. Artifact reuse is
in place within the same arch + suite.


With kind regards,
Baurzhan.