From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S9bPp-0006Yb-6i for bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:10:21 +0100 Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Mar 2012 05:01:29 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="141146782" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.123.198]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Mar 2012 05:01:28 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: "Robert P. J. Day" Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:01:27 +0000 Message-ID: <1927112.bGsHOkriYo@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.8.0 (Linux/3.0.0-16-generic-pae; KDE/4.8.1; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: some preliminary questions about bitbake manual X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:10:21 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Monday 19 March 2012 07:49:59 Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i'm about to write some tutorials on OE/bitbake/poky/yocto (from a > position of moderate ignorance, hoping that will change), so a couple > questions/observations before i get started. > > at risk of repetition, i already noted that if you google on > "bitbake user manual", you end up here: > > http://bitbake.berlios.de/manual/ > > which is *way* out of date, so perhaps a link to something newer would > be useful. Yes, we acknowledge it is quite out of date. The problem with the BitBake manual is it must cover only BitBake generically, and not OE. Of course there's a lot that could be added to it, but having complete documentation there is less important than documenting OE. That's not to say we won't welcome patches though ;) > next, is it fair to say that the current version of the bitbake > manual is the one that's part of bitbake itself, in the doc/ > directory? so if i want to submit some patches, i'd post them to this > list and those patches would always be relative to my current "git > pull" of bitbake? Yes, that's correct. > finally (for now), over at yocto, here's a quick tutorial on getting > started with oe-core: > > https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/OpenEmbedded-Core > > it all looks reasonable but what you end up with in the oe-core > directory is two "bitbake.conf" files: > > $ find . -name bitbake.conf > ./meta/conf/bitbake.conf > ./bitbake/conf/bitbake.conf > $ > > i'm assuming that's by design and there are no weird conflicts > between the two files, right? Sort of - the last one is actually an example config and since it never ends up in BBPATH it will never be used. Now that you mention it, Richard mentioned to me recently that it should probably be renamed to bitbake.conf.sample to avoid confusion. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre