[yocto] bblayer priorities ignored for bbappends?

[Tobias Olausson]

Hi Paul

On 8 April 2015 at 10:55, Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton at linux.intel.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tobias,
>
> On Wednesday 08 April 2015 08:54:20 Tobias Olausson wrote:
> > I just had a weird experience with yocto and I wanted to know if the
> > described behaviour is intentional.
> >
> > I have a layer with priority 7 containing a recipe, foo.bb. In another
> > layer, with priority 8, there is a foo.bbappend. Finally, I just added
> > another layer, with priority 9, where foo.bb is redefined as a binary
> > recipe.
> >
> > When I added the last layer, I expected that to take precedence over the
> > other two. However, the bbappend for foo is still applied (which in this
> > case changed the SRC_URI, making the whole binary recipe moot). Is this
> > really the way it's supposed to be? I would expect that lower layers
> cannot
> > influence layers with higher priority at all, but that does not seem to
> be
> > the case.
>
> That is the case, yes - bbappends are always applied. As far as I am aware
> this is the first time this kind of situation has been asked about though
> so
> it's probably just that we didn't consider it before.
>

I see. I can see a point of always applying bbappends, of course, I had
just never considered it either.


>
> Presumably you could use a bbappend rather than a recipe in the last layer?
> You might need to stub out some of the functions of course, but it should
> be
> possible.
>

Indeed, that is a reasonable solution.


>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> --
>
> Paul Eggleton
> Intel Open Source Technology Centre
>



-- 
Tobias Olausson
M.Sc
Software Engineer

PELAGICORE | Experience Change
Ekelundsgatan 4, 6tr, SE-411 18 Gothenburg, Sweden
Mobile: +46(0)735-873444
E-Mail: tobias.olausson at pelagicore.com
IRC: wto @ FreeNode
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/attachments/20150408/39c19793/attachment.html>