Apparently the finalise spelling is becoming less common in British English.
(Bitbake rev: 47449b2fc433e5725839ca4f7e9bca931a475838)
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <chris_larson@mentor.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
The methodpool, ${@} expansions, anonymous python functions, event handlers
now all run with the same global context, ensuring a consistent environment
for them. Added a bb.utils.better_eval function which does an eval() with the
same globals as better_exec.
(Bitbake rev: 424d7e267b009cc19b8503eadab782736d9597d0)
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <chris_larson@mentor.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
This implements a feature similar to BBCLASSEXTEND, but for generating
multiple versions of a given recipe. For example: BBVERSIONS = "1.0 2.0 git".
In addition to the above, one can utilize [a-b] style patterns, and can have a
:<basever> postfix, which allows you to essentially name the range of
versions. Both the current version and the basever end up in OVERRIDES, and
the basever gets placed into the BPV variable. The default BPV, if none is
specified, is the original PV of the recipe, before bbversions processing.
In this way, you can do things like:
BBVERSIONS = "1.0.[0-6]:1.0.0+
1.0.[7-9]:1.0.7+"
SRC_URI_append_1.0.7+ = "file://some_extra_patch.patch;patch=1"
Or you can create a recipe per range, and name the recipe file as such: nano_1.0.7+.bb.
(Bitbake rev: 4ee9a56e16f1eb3c1649eaa3127b09ab0e93d1ec)
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <chris_larson@mentor.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
??= is a lazy, conditional assignment. Whereas a ?= immediately assigns to
the variable if the variable has not yet been set, ??= does not apply the
default assignment until the end of the parse. As a result, the final ??= for
a given variable is used, as opposed to the first as in ?=.
Note that the initial implementation relies upon finalise() to apply the
defaults, so a "bitbake -e" without specifying a recipe will not show the
defaults as set by ??=. Moving application of the default into getVar adds
too large a performance hit. We may want to revisit this later.
(Bitbake rev: 74f50fbca194c9c72bd2a540f4b9de458cb08e2d)
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <chris_larson@mentor.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
This ensures that an anonymous python function is able to manipulate the
BBCLASSEXTEND contents, and, therefore, amend.inc files are able to add to it.
(Bitbake rev: c7d038d404afaf4ce3735af5134163759da6f6ef)
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <chris_larson@mentor.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
Better to error as early as possible rather than experience strange behavior
resulting from the use of the largely useless stock bitbake.conf/base.bbclass.
(Bitbake rev: 641e6cf3ec3ab4d26929cf4d2a3704ff07eed4d6)
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <chris_larson@mentor.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
Do not attempt to open the file in the resolve_file method
(a lot like bb.which... maybe bb.which can be used). This way
we don't need to open/close a file which we have already parsed.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
Have a growing dict with .inc and .bbclass'es. This avoids to reparse
files we have already seen.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
Our parser is shit but instead to replace it now we will see
how long we can drive the wave by caching parsed files. This
will not go through the feeder again but we can just reevaluate
the StatementGroup.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
Evaluate the statements after having parsed one file. This is
referred to as "entwirren" and we can remove the direct evaluation
and postpone a bit, in the future we can use a cached copy instead
of parsing the original.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
First set of ConfHandling with AST nodes. The include can
use a speed up and things might need to be migrated... into
this class.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
When parsing we will collect a number of statements
that can be evaluated...The plan is to be evaluate
things twice (old+new) and then compare the result,
it should be the same.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
* lineno and fn are needed in handleMethod
to restore the functionality as it was before.
(Bitbake rev: ac6792045959cfee56279c1c4597521e990848e7)
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
We want to convert this into a proper AST. So move all
such operations to methods... Later change them to generate
a node... and create that node from here.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
With obtain it was possible to use an existing fetcher to
download a bb or config file. In practive no one has used it
and it was likely broken in regard to depends_cache... Remove
it for now, simplfiy the code.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
* Make the test functionality work
* Optimise BBPATH handling when changing directory
* Optimise file globing for BBFILES
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@linux.intel.com>
