**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Sat Oct 05 02:59:58 2013 **** BEGIN LOGGING AT Sat Oct 05 13:52:31 2013 Oct 05 16:57:39 sgw_: whats up Oct 05 18:09:40 moin Oct 05 18:33:49 khem: still around? Oct 05 21:30:21 Hi all, I'm trying to find out if there are any recommendation/"naming convention" if you should use ${P} or ${PN} (or perhaps files/) when pointing out SRC_URI files in .bb/.bbappend? meta-layer is very mixed with all kind (so it's not useful as a reference..). Oct 05 21:47:47 epetmab: depends how you organise your recipes... if you only have one recipe/bbappend per directory, files is fine Oct 05 21:51:09 bluelightning: Yeah I agree on that. But personally I like the solution to always use ${P} (even if the recipe is alone) since that will (at least hopefully) force you to go through the file and/or patches when upgrading a recipe to a newer version. Oct 05 21:51:48 bluelightning: One of the pros with this is of course that you more easily can miss re-create the dir to reflect the new version and get something building but with wrong content.. Oct 05 21:52:02 bluelightning: *meant cons.. Oct 05 21:52:21 right, yes Oct 05 21:52:53 and sometimes you probably want BP/BPN rather than P/PN if the recipe is BBCLASSEXTENDed at all Oct 05 21:56:41 yes, you are right. The last one was a good point. But you don't see any big problems to use BP/P (even for the case one recipe per dir)? Oct 05 22:32:24 epetmab: no, that wouldn't cause any problems Oct 05 22:39:41 bluelightning: Ok, thx for your time. **** ENDING LOGGING AT Sun Oct 06 02:59:58 2013