Re: [poky] [PATCH 1/2] meta-poky/conf/templates/default/bblayers.conf.sample: do not assume integrated poky repo

On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 at 18:01, Alexander Kanavin via
lists.yoctoproject.org <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I think that's actually not too horrible. Should I try to prototype
> this? One nice consequence is that it makes templates optional for
> those who do not like them: one could instead set the build entirely
> from just a list of fragments (machine/distro built-ins at a minimum
> :) and layer ids. Having to maintain templates for any possible layer
> combination doesn't scale, same way as on-disk fragments for
> machines/distros wouldn't scale.

After some 'background brain processing', I've convinced myself that
the best way out is that bitbake-setup would be able to write out
bblayers.conf itself directly, from its own configuration file. Yes,
like kas does :) I've resisted this for a long time, on the principle
that bitbake-setup has no business directly meddling in build/conf/,
but really, every other option is not as good.

So, a configuration entry could look like this:

            "qemux86-64-poky": {
                "description": "Poky reference distro build for qemux86-64",
                "bb-layers":
["openembedded-core/meta","meta-yocto/meta-poky","meta-yocto/meta-yocto-bsp"],
                "oe-fragments":
["machine/qemux86-64","distro/poky","core/yocto/sstate-mirror-cdn"],
                "targets": ["bitbake core-image-minimal
core-image-full-cmdline core-image-sato-sdk core-image-weston"]
            },

and would not require templates at all.

Bitbake-setup would write out bblayers.conf with BBLAYERS entry
('bitbake-layers add-layer' can't be used at that point yet), and then
enable fragments via bitbake-config-build (this is already
implemented). This should result in a functional build directory, with
a blank (or absent) local.conf.

Then this patch, and the ones adding 'blank' templates become unnecessary.

Alex