| Summary: | standalone toolchain should notify the user if the target install dir of SDK is one already used | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Yocto Project Subprojects] ADT | Reporter: | Alexandru Georgescu <alexandru.c.georgescu> |
| Component: | adt | Assignee: | Laurentiu Palcu <laurentiu.palcu> |
| Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | Medium | CC: | jessica.zhang, poky.adt.watcher, poky.watcher |
| Version: | 1.4 | ||
| Target Milestone: | 1.4 | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Multiple | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- |
| Verified: | Documentation change: | --- | |
|
Description
Alexandru Georgescu
2012-11-08 14:28:08 UTC
To be clear, for different architecture, we should allow user to install under the same directory. It's only for the same architecture that we should check with user. (In reply to comment #1) > To be clear, for different architecture, we should allow user to install > under the same directory. It's only for the same architecture that we > should check with user. Jessica, as a cosmetic improvement is it possible also inform the user the ARCHITECTURES already installed on that specified directory where previous installations have been occurred? Something like: " In the following $DIR the sdk is already available for ARM, MIPS ..." > Jessica, as a cosmetic improvement is it possible also inform the user the
> ARCHITECTURES already installed on that specified directory where previous
> installations have been occurred?
>
> Something like: " In the following $DIR the sdk is already available for
> ARM, MIPS ..."
I don't see the point of this. I agree, it is important to notify the user that another SDK for the same architecture is already installed, so that the user knows that his files might be overwritten. But listing all the existing SDKs for other architectures that were already installed? I don't find this information useful when installing a new SDK.
Laurentiu, it's just a cosmetic feature and I believe that informing the user won't harm, but even better, will improve the user experience. Good user experience is very welcomed in every product, and that can make a lot of difference in a product. Just my 2 cents. (In reply to comment #4) > Laurentiu, it's just a cosmetic feature and I believe that informing the > user won't harm, but even better, will improve the user experience. Good > user experience is very welcomed in every product, and that can make a lot > of difference in a product. Just my 2 cents. Even though I agree that user experience is important, printing the existing SDKs will only add an extra piece of information that the user will most likely never use. The users usually know what devices they are developing for... Anyway, please file a separate bug for this as it is a low priority change. verified. |