| Submitter | Koen Kooi |
|---|---|
| Date | May 6, 2011, 2:32 p.m. |
| Message ID | <CD6D7C47-8778-4086-AE29-BB954F9DE09D@dominion.thruhere.net> |
| Download | mbox | patch |
| Permalink | /patch/3297/ |
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Comments
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 04:32:08PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > > Op 6 mei 2011, om 15:54 heeft Martin Jansa het volgende geschreven: > > > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 06:51:58AM -0700, Chris Larson wrote: > >> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote: > >>> And related to this: how do I get the "installed but not packaged" output back? The bitbake logging changes are hiding it now, which is counterproductive. > >> > >> Could change those messages from info to warnings, then they'd show up. > > > > Agreed, please change it. I'm using -v since those were not shown, but -v > > brings much more noise then I need. > > Like this? > > --- a/meta/classes/package.bbclass > +++ b/meta/classes/package.bbclass > @@ -676,7 +676,7 @@ python populate_packages () { > unshipped.append(path) > > if unshipped != []: > - bb.note("the following files were installed but not shipped in any package:") > + bb.warn("the following files were installed but not shipped in any package:") > for f in unshipped: I prefer also with files - bb.note(" " + f) + bb.warn(" " + f) because later when reading logs from build I can see if it was something important or just some file I don't need
Patch
--- a/meta/classes/package.bbclass +++ b/meta/classes/package.bbclass @@ -676,7 +676,7 @@ python populate_packages () { unshipped.append(path) if unshipped != []: - bb.note("the following files were installed but not shipped in any package:") + bb.warn("the following files were installed but not shipped in any package:") for f in unshipped: bb.note(" " + f)