From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tim.rpsys.net (93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk [93.97.173.237]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8D5E01423 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q85Lqu7q030837; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:52:56 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 28994-04; Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:52:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q85LqlTF030831 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Sep 2012 22:52:48 +0100 Message-ID: <1346881966.21985.105.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: William Mills Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 22:52:46 +0100 In-Reply-To: <50475FB7.2080408@ti.com> References: <50450DC6.20303@r-finger.com> <50451947.2090401@r-finger.com> <5045C2B7.1070406@r-finger.com> <504637F5.8090603@linux.intel.com> <504663C0.6050907@ti.com> <50468D68.50608@linux.intel.com> <50475FB7.2080408@ti.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org, Darren Hart , "Dmytriyenko, Denys" Subject: Re: yocto beagleboard.conf -- should it not go away? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 21:53:03 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 10:20 -0400, William Mills wrote: > On 09/04/2012 07:23 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > > > > > > On 09/04/2012 01:25 PM, William Mills wrote: > > > >> Darren: Is it true you can't get @ the Intel BSP's w/o also getting the > >> poky distro defs? That does seem to mixing things a bit. (I am not > >> claiming meta-ti is clean yet but I want to understand the Intel examples.) > >> > > > > It isn't something we test as part of the QA that we perform. I mostly > > expect people building meta-intel to be building with meta-yocto > > (although I wouldn't take a hard line on requiring it). That said, I > > removed meta-yocto from a meta-intel/meta-fri2 build and removed > > DISTRO=poky from my local.conf and successfully built and booted a > > core-image-minimal build on an FRI2 this afternoon without any changes. > > > > Thanks! My confidence is restored. > > As long as including meta-yocto does not interfere with other BSPs or > distros etc then there should be no harm in your assumption. > > I would be interested to know what Mentor Graphics and Wind River do on > their products. Do they include meta-yocto? (YP is not all about > comercial OS support but I know these orginatations have done the due > diligence on layer compatibility for a non-poky distro.) Commercial OS support usually involves some of your own policy so meta-yocto is interesting as an example to them but they'd probably only use it as inspiration to write their own. That was always expected and meta-yocto is extremely thin deliberately. Having said that, what meta-yocto was doing was wrong, it wasn't intentional, the implications not fully realised and is hopefully now fixed with the split :). Cheers, Richard