| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The code here for running do_configure if it hadn't already been run was
using the wrong string substitution parameters; fix it and test it.
(From OE-Core rev: b2677a4448dbc42e523c731b953b44006749252c)
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The listing of subcommands in the --help output for devtool was starting
to get difficult to follow, with commands appearing in no particular
order (due to some being in separate modules and the order of those
modules being parsed). Logically grouping the subcommands as well as
being able to exercise some control over the order of the subcommands
and groups would help, if we do so without losing the dynamic nature of
the list (i.e. that it comes from the plugins). Argparse provides no
built-in way to handle this and really, really makes it a pain to add,
but with some subclassing and hacking it's now possible, and can be
extended by any plugin as desired.
To put a subcommand into a group, all you need to do is specify a group=
parameter in the call to subparsers.add_parser(). you can also specify
an order= parameter to make the subcommand sort higher or lower in the
list (higher order numbers appear first, so use negative numbers to
force items to the end if that's what you want). To add a new group, use
subparsers.add_subparser_group(), supplying the name, description and
optionally an order number for the group itself (again, higher numbers
appear first).
(From OE-Core rev: e1b9d31e6ea3c254ecfe940fe795af44761e0e69)
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Looking at Chris Larson's code for starting the user's editor for
"recipetool newappend" it was slightly better than what I wrote for
"devtool edit-recipe" in that it checks VISUAL as well as EDITOR and
defaults to vi if neither are set, so break this out to its own function
and call it from both places. The broken out version passes shell=True
however in case it's a more complicated command rather than just a name
of an executable.
(From OE-Core rev: 184a256931e8cdc7bea97a905c4e67a435964de0)
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When you need to set EXTRA_OECONF for a recipe, you need to know what
options the configure script actually supports; the configure script
however is only accessible from within a devshell and (at least in the
case of autotooled software fetched from an SCM repository) may not
actually exist until do_configure has run. Thus, provide a "devtool
configure-help" subcommand that runs the configure script for a recipe
with --help and shows you the output through a pager (e.g. less),
prefaced by a header describing the current options being specified.
There is basic support for autotools, cmake and bare configure scripts.
The cmake support is a little hacky since cmake doesn't really have a
concise help option that lists user-defined knobs (without actually
running through the configure process), however that being a design
feature of cmake there's not much I can think of to do about that at
the moment.
(From OE-Core rev: 0e5d84d9705091b338000ef02720cfa090f76888)
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
|
standard.py is getting a bit large; move the "utility" commands to
another module.
(From OE-Core rev: 5089b93f5b341dc28c343f7afe15efda2081ed36)
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
