Re: IMAGE_TYPE vs IMAGE_TYPE(S)

[Claudius Heine <claudius.heine.ext@siemens.com>]

Hi Cedric,

On 2018-06-01 16:40, cedric_hombourger@mentor.com wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> The documentation suggests that IMAGE_TYPE may be a list of images to be
> built:
> 
>     | The `IMAGE_TYPE` variable contains the list of image types to generate.
> 
> (ref: https://github.com/ilbers/isar/blob/master/doc/user_manual.md#image-type-selection)
> 
> It appears that one could set this to e.g. "ext4-img wic-img" to get Isar
> to generate both an EXT4 image and a WIC image.
> Alright.
> 
> But then how about this code:
> 
>     | if d.getVar('IMAGE_TYPE', True) == 'wic-img':
>     |     d.appendVar('BUILDCHROOT_PREINSTALL',
>     |                 d.getVar('BUILDCHROOT_PREINSTALL_WIC', True))
> 
> (ref: https://github.com/ilbers/isar/blob/master/meta/recipes-devtools/buildchroot/buildchroot.bb#L45)
> 
> The condition would be False for the example provided above and our
> buildchroot missing vital tools such mkdosfs
> 
> We probably need to fix one or the other. What are your thoughts?

I knew that building multiple image wasn't possible, but I wasn't aware 
it was documented otherwise. Thanks for making us aware of this.

Personally, I would like to have the ability to build multiple images, 
because that would put us a bit more on par with OE.

Also I already thought about exactly your quoted part of the code. IMO 
that cries for some refactoring anyway. Maybe we could use the overwrite 
bitbake syntax for this.

I don't know when I will find time to tackle this. There a just so many 
things to do everywhere ;). So up for grabs IMO.

Cheers,
Claudius

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-54 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: ch@denx.de