layer.conf(s): modify BBFILE_PATTERN

[jwslater0823]

Allow 'No bb files match...' warning to display layer location.

Signed-off-by: Joe Slater joe.slater@windriver.com

[zeddii]

How does this not undo the reason this change was made in the first place ?

Bruce

---

commit 17a10b2
Author: Robert Yang liezhi.yang@windriver.com
Date: Wed Oct 17 11:30:18 2018 +0800

conf/layer.conf: conditionally set BBFILE_PATTERN

Conditionally set BBFILE_PATTERN as what we did for BBFILES.

Fixed when DISTRO != overc:
WARNING: No bb files matched BBFILE_PATTERN_cube '^/path/to/meta-overc/meta-cube/'
WARNING: No bb files matched BBFILE_PATTERN_overc '^/path/to/meta-overc/'

Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>

[jwslater0823]

Well, for DISTRO != overc, we see the warning, but the path info is ‘’. Curious that we see the warning. In any event, I don’t think the value of BBFILE_PATTERN affects warning generation, just what the warning displays. Joe From: Bruce Ashfield <notifications@github.com> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 3:44 PM To: OverC/meta-overc <meta-overc@noreply.github.com> Cc: Slater, Joseph <joe.slater@windriver.com>; Author <author@noreply.github.com> Subject: Re: [OverC/meta-overc] layer.conf(s): modify BBFILE_PATTERN (#274) How does this not undo the reason this change was made in the first place ? Bruce

…

________________________________ commit 17a10b2<17a10b2> Author: Robert Yang liezhi.yang@windriver.com<mailto:liezhi.yang@windriver.com> Date: Wed Oct 17 11:30:18 2018 +0800 conf/layer.conf: conditionally set BBFILE_PATTERN Conditionally set BBFILE_PATTERN as what we did for BBFILES. Fixed when DISTRO != overc: WARNING: No bb files matched BBFILE_PATTERN_cube '^/path/to/meta-overc/meta-cube/' WARNING: No bb files matched BBFILE_PATTERN_overc '^/path/to/meta-overc/' Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com> — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#274?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACDZLT5KAOM4W5TR4I6TX53QPI33DA5CNFSM4JCM47L2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEBWJYIA#issuecomment-543988768>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACDZLT5VWRUSSYMOJOT2PDLQPI33DANCNFSM4JCM47LQ>.

[zeddii]

hmm. So what we are saying is that the conditional protection against the warning isn't working at all ? I'd like to look into that more before reverting the conditional check.