Bug 10292

Summary: Suggested addition to complete the description of 'bitbake -e'
Product: [Documentation] Reference Reporter: ulfalizer
Component: handbookAssignee: Scott Rifenbark <srifenbark>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: Medium CC: bluelightning, poky.doc.watcher, poky.watcher, srifenbark
Version: 2.2   
Target Milestone: 2.2 M4   
Hardware: x86   
OS: Multiple   
Whiteboard: 22 Sept 2016: RESOLVED
OS type for building Yocto: --- Type of Regression: ---
Verified: Documentation change: Done (doc changes complete)

Description ulfalizer 2016-09-16 23:03:00 UTC
Hello,

'bitbake -e' includes some other information in addition to variable values. I
suggest adding the following to the end of '2.3.2. Viewing Variable Values' to
complete the description:

  In addition to variable values, the following information is included in the
  output of 'bitbake -e' and 'bitbake -e <recipe>':
  
    * The output starts with a tree listing all configuration files and classes
      included globally, recursively listing the files they include or inherit
      in turn. Much of the behavior of the OpenEmbedded build system (including
      the behavior of the
      [normal recipe build tasks](http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.2/ref-manual/ref-manual.html#normal-recipe-build-tasks))
      is implemented in [base.bbclass] and the classes it inherits, rather than
      being built into BitBake itself.
  
    * After the variable values, all functions are listed. For shell functions,
      variables referenced within the function body are expanded. If a function
      has been modified using overrides or override-style operators like
      "_append" and "_prepend", then the final assembled function body is
      shown.


Cheers,
Ulf
Comment 1 Scott Rifenbark 2016-09-21 20:54:54 UTC
Ulf, 

See http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.2/ref-manual/ref-manual.html#usingpoky-debugging-viewing-variable-values for the additional information.  I did a bit of word-smithing to try and get as much active voice as I could.

Thanks,
Scott
Comment 2 ulfalizer 2016-09-22 04:45:03 UTC
Looks good to me. I agree that active voice sounds a bit more natural. Just hadn't thought about it much until now. :)

Cheers,
Ulf
Comment 3 Scott Rifenbark 2016-09-22 23:02:21 UTC
Ulf, 

Thanks.  Active voice is a standard we try to strive for in technical writing.  I think it stems from the content being "bone dry" in most cases :)  haha. 

I am closing this bug.

Thanks, 
Scott