From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rq6Sm-0002xt-GF for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:16:48 +0100 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Jan 2012 06:47:45 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="110627692" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.122.164]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Jan 2012 06:47:44 -0800 From: Paul Eggleton To: Philip Balister Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:47:43 +0000 Message-ID: <1908796.glHMrEiIxU@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.8 rc2 (Linux/3.0.0-15-generic-pae; KDE/4.7.97; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4F20130D.2010208@balister.org> References: <1592899.mTy93uB97i@helios> <4F20130D.2010208@balister.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Splitting meta-oe X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:16:48 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Wednesday 25 January 2012 09:34:53 Philip Balister wrote: > On 01/25/2012 07:48 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > I think what most people want when they enable meta-oe in their layer > > configuration is #1, and it's probably OK to get #2 along with it. They do > > not however expect versions of toolchains, eglibc or other fairly > > fundamental bits and pieces that might cause their build to fail when > > everything worked fine just building with OE-Core (#4). Equally I expect > > there will be some people who want just #3 and nothing else. > > My understanding is the OE-Core toolchains lack the Linaro patches which > a extremely useful for people using armv7. So dropping toolchains from > meta-oe would be a really bad thing for a large portion of the user base. I was suggesting moving these toolchains to a separate layer where those who don't need them aren't tripping over them. Adding such a layer to your configuration is more or less trivial, and once done you would not notice any difference. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre