[PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Franklin S. Cooper Jr]

* People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between the minimal
  file system and the larger file system.
* Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the larger
  file system.

Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
---
 ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
 rename meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} (87%)

diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
similarity index 87%
rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
--- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
+++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
     packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
     "
 
-export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
+export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
-- 
1.7.0.4

[PATCH 2/2] Use updated base image name

[Franklin S. Cooper Jr]

* Change references from arago-base-tisdk-image to tisdk-rootfs-base-image to
  match updated image name.

Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
---
 meta-arago-distro/classes/tisdk-image.bbclass      |    2 +-
 .../recipes-core/images/arago-core-tisdk-image.inc |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/classes/tisdk-image.bbclass b/meta-arago-distro/classes/tisdk-image.bbclass
index 4397a70..1ccd2cd 100644
--- a/meta-arago-distro/classes/tisdk-image.bbclass
+++ b/meta-arago-distro/classes/tisdk-image.bbclass
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ PACKAGE_ARCH = "${MACHINE_ARCH}"
 # List of target side images to be built and packaged.  By default take
 # the base image but this can be modified if desired to package
 # additional images.
-TARGET_IMAGES ?= "arago-base-tisdk-image"
+TARGET_IMAGES ?= "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
 
 # path to install the meta-toolchain package in the SDK
 TISDK_TOOLCHAIN_PATH ?= "linux-devkit"
diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-core-tisdk-image.inc b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-core-tisdk-image.inc
index 1d00117..aaf2742 100644
--- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-core-tisdk-image.inc
+++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-core-tisdk-image.inc
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ DTB_FILTER_omap5-evm = "omap5"
 DTB_FILTER_dra7xx-evm = "dra7"
 
 # List of target side images to build for the SDK
-TARGET_IMAGES = "arago-base-tisdk-image tisdk-rootfs-image"
+TARGET_IMAGES = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image tisdk-rootfs-image"
 
 TISDK_TOOLCHAIN = "meta-toolchain-arago-tisdk"
 
-- 
1.7.0.4

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Dmytriyenko, Denys]

What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK setup...


-----Original Message-----
From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

* People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between the minimal
  file system and the larger file system.
* Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the larger
  file system.

Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
---
 ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} (87%)

diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
similarity index 87%
rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
--- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
+++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
     packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
     "
 
-export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
+export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
--
1.7.0.4

_______________________________________________
meta-arago mailing list
meta-arago@arago-project.org
http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file system image
> 
> What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with tisdk-rootfs-
> prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK setup...
[Franklin] 
This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning was.

I do assume there might be instances where some script somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the full image as "tisdk-rootfs*" 

> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file
> system image
> 
> * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between the
> minimal
>   file system and the larger file system.
> * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the larger
>   file system.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> ---
>  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-
> image.bb} (87%)
> 
> diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> similarity index 87%
> rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> image.bb
> rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
>      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
>      "
> 
> -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> --
> 1.7.0.4
> 
> _______________________________________________
> meta-arago mailing list
> meta-arago@arago-project.org
> http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> > file system image
> > 
> > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with tisdk-rootfs-
> > prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK setup...
> [Franklin] 
> This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning was.
> 
> I do assume there might be instances where some script somewhere will need 
> to be updated if it refers to the full image as "tisdk-rootfs*"

So, I located the change I was talking about:
http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2c

The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague description, so I'm not 
sure or don't remember what was the problem that you had to rename the 
original arago-tisdk-image into tisdk-rootfs-image...

-- 
Denys


> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file
> > system image
> > 
> > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between the
> > minimal
> >   file system and the larger file system.
> > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the larger
> >   file system.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > ---
> >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > image.bb} (87%)
> > 
> > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > similarity index 87%
> > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > image.bb
> > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> >      "
> > 
> > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > --
> > 1.7.0.4
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > meta-arago mailing list
> > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:31 PM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file system image
> 
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > Rename base file system image
> > >
> > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with
> > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK setup...
> > [Franklin]
> > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning was.
> >
> > I do assume there might be instances where some script somewhere will
> > need to be updated if it refers to the full image as "tisdk-rootfs*"
> 
> So, I located the change I was talking about:
> http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2c
> 
> The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague description, so I'm not sure
> or don't remember what was the problem that you had to rename the original
> arago-tisdk-image into tisdk-rootfs-image...
> 
[Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to reference the image tarball. So the assumption was that the recipe/package name was the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME must match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
> --
> Denys
> 
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file
> > > system image
> > >
> > > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between the
> > > minimal
> > >   file system and the larger file system.
> > > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the
> larger
> > >   file system.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > > ---
> > >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-
> base-
> > > image.bb} (87%)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> image.bb
> > > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > > similarity index 87%
> > > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > image.bb
> > > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> image.bb
> > > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> > > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> > >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> > >      "
> > >
> > > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > > --
> > > 1.7.0.4
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > meta-arago mailing list
> > > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 03:38:06PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:31 PM
> > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> > file system image
> > 
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > Rename base file system image
> > > >
> > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with
> > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK setup...
> > > [Franklin]
> > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning was.
> > >
> > > I do assume there might be instances where some script somewhere will
> > > need to be updated if it refers to the full image as "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > 
> > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2c
> > 
> > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague description, so I'm not sure
> > or don't remember what was the problem that you had to rename the original
> > arago-tisdk-image into tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > 

> [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in two ways in 
> that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to reference the image 
> tarball. So the assumption was that the recipe/package name was the same as 
> the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME must match. Otherwise 
> the image would be built but the class wouldn't know what tarball to look 
> for.

Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing even further back 
shows that you added the recipe to have IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs":

http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16ec4a

Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in Classic arago, 
but there it had the basename matching the recipe name. Wondering why the 
change?

-- 
Denys


> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > > > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > > > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> > file
> > > > system image
> > > >
> > > > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between the
> > > > minimal
> > > >   file system and the larger file system.
> > > > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the
> > larger
> > > >   file system.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> > > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > > > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-
> > base-
> > > > image.bb} (87%)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > image.bb
> > > > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > > > similarity index 87%
> > > > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > > image.bb
> > > > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > image.bb
> > > > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > > > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> > > > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > > > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> > > >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> > > >      "
> > > >
> > > > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > > > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > > > --
> > > > 1.7.0.4
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > meta-arago mailing list
> > > > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 3:19 PM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file system image
> 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 03:38:06PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:31 PM
> > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > Rename base file system image
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > > Rename base file system image
> > > > >
> > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with
> > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK
> setup...
> > > > [Franklin]
> > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning was.
> > > >
> > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script somewhere
> > > > will need to be updated if it refers to the full image as "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > >
> > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2c
> > >
> > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague description, so
> > > I'm not sure or don't remember what was the problem that you had to
> > > rename the original arago-tisdk-image into tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > >
> 
> > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in two
> > ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to reference the
> > image tarball. So the assumption was that the recipe/package name was
> > the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> must
> > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class wouldn't know
> > what tarball to look for.
> 
> Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing even further back
> shows that you added the recipe to have IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs":
> 
> http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16ec4a
> 
> Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in Classic arago,
> but there it had the basename matching the recipe name. Wondering why the
> change?
[Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming that the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem files.
Looking at Sitara AMSDK 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem tarballs were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> 
> --
> Denys
> 
> 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > > > > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > > > > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
> base
> > > file
> > > > > system image
> > > > >
> > > > > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between
> the
> > > > > minimal
> > > > >   file system and the larger file system.
> > > > > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the
> > > larger
> > > > >   file system.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> > > > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > > > > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-
> > > base-
> > > > > image.bb} (87%)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > image.bb
> > > > > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > > > > similarity index 87%
> > > > > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > > > image.bb
> > > > > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > > image.bb
> > > > > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > > > > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> > > > > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> image.bb
> > > > > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> > > > >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> > > > >      "
> > > > >
> > > > > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > > > > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > > > > --
> > > > > 1.7.0.4
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > meta-arago mailing list
> > > > > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:55:07PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 3:19 PM
> > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> > file system image
> > 
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 03:38:06PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:31 PM
> > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > Rename base file system image
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > > > Rename base file system image
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images with
> > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by the SDK
> > setup...
> > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning was.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script somewhere
> > > > > will need to be updated if it refers to the full image as "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > >
> > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2c
> > > >
> > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague description, so
> > > > I'm not sure or don't remember what was the problem that you had to
> > > > rename the original arago-tisdk-image into tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > >
> > 
> > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in two
> > > ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to reference the
> > > image tarball. So the assumption was that the recipe/package name was
> > > the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > must
> > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class wouldn't know
> > > what tarball to look for.
> > 
> > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing even further back
> > shows that you added the recipe to have IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs":
> > 
> > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16ec4a
> > 
> > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in Classic arago,
> > but there it had the basename matching the recipe name. Wondering why the
> > change?

> [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem tarball with 
> the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming that the SDK backend script 
> that built the sdk renamed those filesystem files. Looking at Sitara AMSDK 
> 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem tarballs were named 
> base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During 
> that time I was focused on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it 
> to look like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other 
> reason.

Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of requirement for that 
name change. If there is not, then we can look for a better names for full 
image as well as base image.

Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes? Is 
tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?

-- 
Denys


> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > > > > > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > > > > > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
> > base
> > > > file
> > > > > > system image
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming between
> > the
> > > > > > minimal
> > > > > >   file system and the larger file system.
> > > > > > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of the
> > > > larger
> > > > > >   file system.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> > > > > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > > > > > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-
> > > > base-
> > > > > > image.bb} (87%)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > > image.bb
> > > > > > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb
> > > > > > similarity index 87%
> > > > > > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > > > image.bb
> > > > > > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > > > > > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-image.bb
> > > > > > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > image.bb
> > > > > > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> > > > > >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> > > > > >      "
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > > > > > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 1.7.0.4
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > meta-arago mailing list
> > > > > > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 4:14 PM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file system image
> 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:55:07PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 3:19 PM
> > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > Rename base file system image
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 03:38:06PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:31 PM
> > > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > > Rename base file system image
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > > > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > > > > Rename base file system image
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by
> > > > > > > the SDK
> > > setup...
> > > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning
> was.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script
> > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the full image as
> "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > >
> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> > > > > c
> > > > >
> > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague
> > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember what was the
> > > > > problem that you had to rename the original arago-tisdk-image into
> tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in
> > > > two ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to
> > > > reference the image tarball. So the assumption was that the
> > > > recipe/package name was the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the
> > > > recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > > must
> > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class wouldn't
> > > > know what tarball to look for.
> > >
> > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing even
> > > further back shows that you added the recipe to have IMAGE_BASENAME =
> "tisdk-rootfs":
> > >
> > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16ec4a
> > >
> > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in
> > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching the recipe
> > > name. Wondering why the change?
> 
> > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem tarball
> > with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming that the SDK
> > backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem files.
> > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem tarballs were
> > named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused on just
> > getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look like the output
> > from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> 
> Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of requirement for that
> name change. If there is not, then we can look for a better names for full image
> as well as base image.
> 
> Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes? Is
> tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
[Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" images from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming convention we use for our current images minus the one I created this patch for :). But I'm open to suggestions.
> 
> --
> Denys
> 
> 
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > > > > > > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > > > > > > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
> > > base
> > > > > file
> > > > > > > system image
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming
> between
> > > the
> > > > > > > minimal
> > > > > > >   file system and the larger file system.
> > > > > > > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of
> the
> > > > > larger
> > > > > > >   file system.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> > > > > > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > > > > > > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-
> rootfs-
> > > > > base-
> > > > > > > image.bb} (87%)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> image.bb
> > > > > > > similarity index 87%
> > > > > > > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-
> tisdk-
> > > > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> image.bb
> > > > > > > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > > image.bb
> > > > > > > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> > > > > > >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> > > > > > >      "
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > > > > > > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > 1.7.0.4
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > meta-arago mailing list
> > > > > > > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 4:14 PM
> > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> > file system image
> > 
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:55:07PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 3:19 PM
> > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > Rename base file system image
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 03:38:06PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 2:31 PM
> > > > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > > > Rename base file system image
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 04:05:10PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > > > > > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> > > > > > > > Rename base file system image
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by
> > > > > > > > the SDK
> > > > setup...
> > > > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning
> > was.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script
> > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the full image as
> > "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > >
> > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> > > > > > c
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague
> > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember what was the
> > > > > > problem that you had to rename the original arago-tisdk-image into
> > tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in
> > > > > two ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to
> > > > > reference the image tarball. So the assumption was that the
> > > > > recipe/package name was the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the
> > > > > recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > > > must
> > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class wouldn't
> > > > > know what tarball to look for.
> > > >
> > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing even
> > > > further back shows that you added the recipe to have IMAGE_BASENAME =
> > "tisdk-rootfs":
> > > >
> > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16ec4a
> > > >
> > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in
> > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching the recipe
> > > > name. Wondering why the change?
> > 
> > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem tarball
> > > with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming that the SDK
> > > backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem files.
> > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem tarballs were
> > > named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused on just
> > > getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look like the output
> > > from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> > 
> > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of requirement for that
> > name change. If there is not, then we can look for a better names for full image
> > as well as base image.
> > 
> > Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes? Is
> > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?

> [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" images from the 
> "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming convention we use for our 
> current images minus the one I created this patch for :). But I'm open to 
> suggestions.

I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from sdk. Arago 
distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be exact. Other SDK 
products can build on top with slight variations.

We can place more generic packagegroups and images into meta-arago-extras and 
keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-distro.

As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the arago- prefix for 
the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition - arago-base-image, 
arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk- prefix, but "rootfs" part always 
felt slightly artificial to me, as it was forced from outside and in OE images 
are images and there's no need to call them rootfs.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time to align on the 
naming convention for our images and we don't need to stick to any of the 
existing names...

-- 
Denys


> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> > > > > > > > bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
> > > > > > > > To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > > > Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > > > > > > Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
> > > > base
> > > > > > file
> > > > > > > > system image
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming
> > between
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > minimal
> > > > > > > >   file system and the larger file system.
> > > > > > > > * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of
> > the
> > > > > > larger
> > > > > > > >   file system.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >  ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> > > > > > > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)  rename meta-arago-
> > > > > > > > distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-
> > rootfs-
> > > > > > base-
> > > > > > > > image.bb} (87%)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > > b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > image.bb
> > > > > > > > similarity index 87%
> > > > > > > > rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-
> > tisdk-
> > > > > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > > rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > > > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > > index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
> > image.bb
> > > > > > > > +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
> > > > image.bb
> > > > > > > > @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
> > > > > > > >      packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
> > > > > > > >      "
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
> > > > > > > > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 1.7.0.4
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > meta-arago mailing list
> > > > > > > > meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs images
> > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something forced by
> > > > > > > > > the SDK
> > > > > setup...
> > > > > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the original reasoning
> > > was.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script
> > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the full image as
> > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > >
> > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> > > > > > > c
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague
> > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember what was the
> > > > > > > problem that you had to rename the original arago-tisdk-image into
> > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used in
> > > > > > two ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2 to
> > > > > > reference the image tarball. So the assumption was that the
> > > > > > recipe/package name was the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME. So the
> > > > > > recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > > > > must
> > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class wouldn't
> > > > > > know what tarball to look for.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing even
> > > > > further back shows that you added the recipe to have IMAGE_BASENAME =
> > > "tisdk-rootfs":
> > > > >
> > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16ec4a
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in
> > > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching the recipe
> > > > > name. Wondering why the change?
> > > 
> > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem tarball
> > > > with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming that the SDK
> > > > backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem files.
> > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem tarballs were
> > > > named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused on just
> > > > getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look like the output
> > > > from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> > > 
> > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of requirement for that
> > > name change. If there is not, then we can look for a better names for full image
> > > as well as base image.
> > > 
> > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes? Is
> > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
> 
> > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" images from the 
> > "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming convention we use for our 
> > current images minus the one I created this patch for :). But I'm open to 
> > suggestions.
> 
> I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from sdk. Arago 
> distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be exact. Other SDK 
> products can build on top with slight variations.
> 
> We can place more generic packagegroups and images into meta-arago-extras and 
> keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-distro.
> 
> As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the arago- prefix for 
> the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition - arago-base-image, 
> arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk- prefix, but "rootfs" part always 
> felt slightly artificial to me, as it was forced from outside and in OE images 
> are images and there's no need to call them rootfs.
> 
> Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time to align on the 
> naming convention for our images and we don't need to stick to any of the 
> existing names...

Franklin,

Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, including base and full 
tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that is scalable 
enough. As I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk-image 
vs. simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus it has to 
work with your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)

-- 
Denys

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file system image
> 
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs
> > > > > > > > > > images with
> > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something
> > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK
> > > > > > setup...
> > > > > > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the
> > > > > > > > > original reasoning
> > > > was.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script
> > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the
> > > > > > > > > full image as
> > > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> > > > > > > > c
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague
> > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember what was
> > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original
> > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into
> > > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is used
> > > > > > > in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build dependency and 2
> > > > > > > to reference the image tarball. So the assumption was that
> > > > > > > the recipe/package name was the same as the IMAGE_BASENAME.
> > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > > > > > must
> > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class
> > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing
> > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe to have
> > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME =
> > > > "tisdk-rootfs":
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16e
> > > > > > c4a
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was in
> > > > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching the
> > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change?
> > > >
> > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem
> > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming that
> > > > > the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem files.
> > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem tarballs
> > > > > were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused
> > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look
> > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of requirement
> > > > for that name change. If there is not, then we can look for a
> > > > better names for full image as well as base image.
> > > >
> > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes? Is
> > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
> >
> > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" images
> > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming convention
> > > we use for our current images minus the one I created this patch for
> > > :). But I'm open to suggestions.
> >
> > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from sdk.
> > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be exact.
> > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
> >
> > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
> > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-distro.
> >
> > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the arago-
> > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition -
> > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk- prefix,
> > but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as it was
> > forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's no need to call
> them rootfs.
> >
> > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time to
> > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't need to
> > stick to any of the existing names...
> 
> Franklin,
> 
> Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, including base and full
> tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that is scalable enough. As
> I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk-image vs.
> simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus it has to work with
> your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
[Franklin] 

How about the following:

tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed image)

tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image
arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-base-sdk-image
arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image
Tisdk-server-rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image

Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on meta-ti I think we could drop the "ti" from the image name to make it simpler.
Based on the above logic I would probably change our packagegroups from using tisdk and simply call it sdk. 
But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the packagegroups and images name.

> 
> --
> Denys

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Maupin, Chase]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
>bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
>Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM
>To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
>Rename base file system image
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
>> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
>> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
>Rename base
>> file system image
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
>wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin
>wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming
>rootfs
>> > > > > > > > > > images with
>> > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was
>something
>> > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK
>> > > > > > setup...
>> > > > > > > > > [Franklin]
>> > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what
>the
>> > > > > > > > > original reasoning
>> > > > was.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some
>script
>> > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers
>to the
>> > > > > > > > > full image as
>> > > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
>> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > >
>> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
>> > > > > > > > c
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather
>vague
>> > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember
>what was
>> > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original
>> > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into
>> > > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable
>is used
>> > > > > > > in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build
>dependency and 2
>> > > > > > > to reference the image tarball. So the assumption
>was that
>> > > > > > > the recipe/package name was the same as the
>IMAGE_BASENAME.
>> > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
>> > > > > > must
>> > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the
>class
>> > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for.
>Tracing
>> > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe to
>have
>> > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME =
>> > > > "tisdk-rootfs":
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
>> > > > > >
>arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16e
>> > > > > > c4a
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe
>was in
>> > > > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching
>the
>> > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change?
>> > > >
>> > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the
>filesystem
>> > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am
>assuming that
>> > > > > the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed those
>filesystem files.
>> > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
>> > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem
>tarballs
>> > > > > were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
>> > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was
>focused
>> > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it to
>look
>> > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had
>any other reason.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of
>requirement
>> > > > for that name change. If there is not, then we can look
>for a
>> > > > better names for full image as well as base image.
>> > > >
>> > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image
>recipes? Is
>> > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
>> >
>> > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago"
>images
>> > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming
>convention
>> > > we use for our current images minus the one I created this
>patch for
>> > > :). But I'm open to suggestions.
>> >
>> > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from
>sdk.
>> > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be
>exact.
>> > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
>> >
>> > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
>> > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-
>distro.
>> >
>> > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the
>arago-
>> > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition
>-
>> > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk-
>prefix,
>> > but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as it
>was
>> > forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's no
>need to call
>> them rootfs.
>> >
>> > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time
>to
>> > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't
>need to
>> > stick to any of the existing names...
>>
>> Franklin,
>>
>> Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, including
>base and full
>> tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that is
>scalable enough. As
>> I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk-
>image vs.
>> simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus it
>has to work with
>> your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
>[Franklin]
>
>How about the following:
>
>tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed
>image)

What will this image contain?

>
>tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image

I want to differentiate between rootfs vs. sdk images.  So maybe this one is arago-sdk-full-rootfs-image

>arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-base-sdk-image

arago-sdk-base-rootfs-image

>arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image

Keep the same

>Tisdk-server-rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image

arago-sdk-server-rootfs-image

What do you think?

>
>Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on
>meta-ti I think we could drop the "ti" from the image name to make
>it simpler.
>Based on the above logic I would probably change our packagegroups
>from using tisdk and simply call it sdk.
>But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the
>packagegroups and images name.
>
>>
>> --
>> Denys
>_______________________________________________
>meta-arago mailing list
>meta-arago@arago-project.org
>http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:28:43PM -0400, Maupin, Chase wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
> >bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM
> >To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> >Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> >Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> >Rename base file system image
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
> >> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> >> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> >> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
> >Rename base
> >> file system image
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
> >wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin
> >wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming
> >rootfs
> >> > > > > > > > > > images with
> >> > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was
> >something
> >> > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK
> >> > > > > > setup...
> >> > > > > > > > > [Franklin]
> >> > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what
> >the
> >> > > > > > > > > original reasoning
> >> > > > was.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some
> >script
> >> > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers
> >to the
> >> > > > > > > > > full image as
> >> > > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> >> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> >> > > > > > > > c
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather
> >vague
> >> > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember
> >what was
> >> > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original
> >> > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into
> >> > > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable
> >is used
> >> > > > > > > in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build
> >dependency and 2
> >> > > > > > > to reference the image tarball. So the assumption
> >was that
> >> > > > > > > the recipe/package name was the same as the
> >IMAGE_BASENAME.
> >> > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> >> > > > > > must
> >> > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the
> >class
> >> > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for.
> >Tracing
> >> > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe to
> >have
> >> > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME =
> >> > > > "tisdk-rootfs":
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> >> > > > > >
> >arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16e
> >> > > > > > c4a
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe
> >was in
> >> > > > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching
> >the
> >> > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the
> >filesystem
> >> > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am
> >assuming that
> >> > > > > the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed those
> >filesystem files.
> >> > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> >> > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem
> >tarballs
> >> > > > > were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> >> > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was
> >focused
> >> > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it to
> >look
> >> > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had
> >any other reason.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of
> >requirement
> >> > > > for that name change. If there is not, then we can look
> >for a
> >> > > > better names for full image as well as base image.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image
> >recipes? Is
> >> > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
> >> >
> >> > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago"
> >images
> >> > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming
> >convention
> >> > > we use for our current images minus the one I created this
> >patch for
> >> > > :). But I'm open to suggestions.
> >> >
> >> > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from
> >sdk.
> >> > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be
> >exact.
> >> > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
> >> >
> >> > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
> >> > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-
> >distro.
> >> >
> >> > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the
> >arago-
> >> > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition
> >-
> >> > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk-
> >prefix,
> >> > but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as it
> >was
> >> > forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's no
> >need to call
> >> them rootfs.
> >> >
> >> > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time
> >to
> >> > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't
> >need to
> >> > stick to any of the existing names...
> >>
> >> Franklin,
> >>
> >> Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, including
> >base and full
> >> tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that is
> >scalable enough. As
> >> I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk-
> >image vs.
> >> simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus it
> >has to work with
> >> your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
> >[Franklin]
> >
> >How about the following:
> >
> >tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed
> >image)
> 
> What will this image contain?
> 
> >
> >tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image
> 
> I want to differentiate between rootfs vs. sdk images.  So maybe this one is 
> arago-sdk-full-rootfs-image

Heh, I was the one who asked Franklin specifically to drop "rootfs" part... :) 
Please read the above explanation. For the most part, images are rootfs. But I 
see what you are saying - we now have these hybrid SDK images that contain 
other rootfs images, kernel/bootloader images and devkit(s). So, how about we 
clearly mark those instead of everything else with "rootfs"?


> >arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-base-sdk-image
> 
> arago-sdk-base-rootfs-image
> 
> >arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image
> 
> Keep the same
> 
> >Tisdk-server-rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image
> 
> arago-sdk-server-rootfs-image
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> >
> >Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on
> >meta-ti I think we could drop the "ti" from the image name to make
> >it simpler.
> >Based on the above logic I would probably change our packagegroups
> >from using tisdk and simply call it sdk.
> >But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the
> >packagegroups and images name.
> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> Denys
> >_______________________________________________
> >meta-arago mailing list
> >meta-arago@arago-project.org
> >http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Maupin, Chase]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 2:52 PM
>To: Maupin, Chase
>Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
>Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
>Rename base file system image
>
>On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:28:43PM -0400, Maupin, Chase wrote:
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
>> >bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
>> >Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM
>> >To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>> >Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> >Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
>> >Rename base file system image
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
>> >> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
>> >> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-
>image:
>> >Rename base
>> >> file system image
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
>> >wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr.,
>Franklin
>> >wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming
>> >rootfs
>> >> > > > > > > > > > images with
>> >> > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was
>> >something
>> >> > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK
>> >> > > > > > setup...
>> >> > > > > > > > > [Franklin]
>> >> > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what
>> >the
>> >> > > > > > > > > original reasoning
>> >> > > > was.
>> >> > > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where
>some
>> >script
>> >> > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it
>refers
>> >to the
>> >> > > > > > > > > full image as
>> >> > > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
>> >> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >>
>arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
>> >> > > > > > > > c
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather
>> >vague
>> >> > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember
>> >what was
>> >> > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original
>> >> > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into
>> >> > > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES
>variable
>> >is used
>> >> > > > > > > in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build
>> >dependency and 2
>> >> > > > > > > to reference the image tarball. So the assumption
>> >was that
>> >> > > > > > > the recipe/package name was the same as the
>> >IMAGE_BASENAME.
>> >> > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
>> >> > > > > > must
>> >> > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the
>> >class
>> >> > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for.
>> >Tracing
>> >> > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe
>to
>> >have
>> >> > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME =
>> >> > > > "tisdk-rootfs":
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
>> >> > > > > >
>> >arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16e
>> >> > > > > > c4a
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image
>recipe
>> >was in
>> >> > > > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename
>matching
>> >the
>> >> > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the
>> >filesystem
>> >> > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am
>> >assuming that
>> >> > > > > the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed
>those
>> >filesystem files.
>> >> > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
>> >> > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two
>filesystem
>> >tarballs
>> >> > > > > were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
>> >> > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I
>was
>> >focused
>> >> > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it
>to
>> >look
>> >> > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I
>had
>> >any other reason.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of
>> >requirement
>> >> > > > for that name change. If there is not, then we can look
>> >for a
>> >> > > > better names for full image as well as base image.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image
>> >recipes? Is
>> >> > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
>> >> >
>> >> > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago"
>> >images
>> >> > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming
>> >convention
>> >> > > we use for our current images minus the one I created
>this
>> >patch for
>> >> > > :). But I'm open to suggestions.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago
>from
>> >sdk.
>> >> > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be
>> >exact.
>> >> > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
>> >> >
>> >> > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
>> >> > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-
>arago-
>> >distro.
>> >> >
>> >> > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to
>the
>> >arago-
>> >> > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic
>tradition
>> >-
>> >> > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with
>tisdk-
>> >prefix,
>> >> > but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as
>it
>> >was
>> >> > forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's
>no
>> >need to call
>> >> them rootfs.
>> >> >
>> >> > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect
>time
>> >to
>> >> > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't
>> >need to
>> >> > stick to any of the existing names...
>> >>
>> >> Franklin,
>> >>
>> >> Can you think of a unified naming for all the images,
>including
>> >base and full
>> >> tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that
>is
>> >scalable enough. As
>> >> I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk-
>> >image vs.
>> >> simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus
>it
>> >has to work with
>> >> your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
>> >[Franklin]
>> >
>> >How about the following:
>> >
>> >tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed
>> >image)
>>
>> What will this image contain?
>>
>> >
>> >tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image
>>
>> I want to differentiate between rootfs vs. sdk images.  So maybe
>this one is
>> arago-sdk-full-rootfs-image
>
>Heh, I was the one who asked Franklin specifically to drop
>"rootfs" part... :)
>Please read the above explanation. For the most part, images are
>rootfs. But I
>see what you are saying - we now have these hybrid SDK images that
>contain
>other rootfs images, kernel/bootloader images and devkit(s). So,
>how about we
>clearly mark those instead of everything else with "rootfs"?

That works too

>
>
>> >arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-base-sdk-image
>>
>> arago-sdk-base-rootfs-image
>>
>> >arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image
>>
>> Keep the same
>>
>> >Tisdk-server-rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image
>>
>> arago-sdk-server-rootfs-image
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> >
>> >Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on
>> >meta-ti I think we could drop the "ti" from the image name to
>make
>> >it simpler.
>> >Based on the above logic I would probably change our
>packagegroups
>> >from using tisdk and simply call it sdk.
>> >But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the
>> >packagegroups and images name.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Denys
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >meta-arago mailing list
>> >meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> >http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:57 PM, "Maupin, Chase" <chase.maupin@ti.com> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 2:52 PM
>> To: Maupin, Chase
>> Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin; meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
>> Rename base file system image
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:28:43PM -0400, Maupin, Chase wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
>>>> bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM
>>>> To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>>>> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image:
>>>> Rename base file system image
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
>>>>> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
>>>>> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-
>> image:
>>>> Rename base
>>>>> file system image
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr.,
>> Franklin
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the initial reason to start naming
>>>> rootfs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> images with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was
>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forced by the SDK
>>>>>>>>>> setup...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Franklin]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This was before my time so I am not sure what
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> original reasoning
>>>>>>>> was.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do assume there might be instances where
>> some
>>>> script
>>>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere will need to be updated if it
>> refers
>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> full image as
>>>>>>>> "tisdk-rootfs*"
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, I located the change I was talking about:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
>> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
>>>>>>>>>>>> c
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather
>>>> vague
>>>>>>>>>>>> description, so I'm not sure or don't remember
>>>> what was
>>>>>>>>>>>> the problem that you had to rename the original
>>>>>>>>>>>> arago-tisdk-image into
>>>>>>>> tisdk-rootfs-image...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES
>> variable
>>>> is used
>>>>>>>>>>> in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build
>>>> dependency and 2
>>>>>>>>>>> to reference the image tarball. So the assumption
>>>> was that
>>>>>>>>>>> the recipe/package name was the same as the
>>>> IMAGE_BASENAME.
>>>>>>>>>>> So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
>>>>>>>>>> must
>>>>>>>>>>> match. Otherwise the image would be built but the
>>>> class
>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for.
>>>> Tracing
>>>>>>>>>> even further back shows that you added the recipe
>> to
>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> IMAGE_BASENAME =
>>>>>>>> "tisdk-rootfs":
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
>>>> arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16e
>>>>>>>>>> c4a
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Do you remember the reason for that? This image
>> recipe
>>>> was in
>>>>>>>>>> Classic arago, but there it had the basename
>> matching
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> recipe name. Wondering why the change?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the
>>>> filesystem
>>>>>>>>> tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am
>>>> assuming that
>>>>>>>>> the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed
>> those
>>>> filesystem files.
>>>>>>>>> Looking at Sitara AMSDK
>>>>>>>>> 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two
>> filesystem
>>>> tarballs
>>>>>>>>> were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
>>>>>>>>> tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I
>> was
>>>> focused
>>>>>>>>> on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it
>> to
>>>> look
>>>>>>>>> like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I
>> had
>>>> any other reason.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of
>>>> requirement
>>>>>>>> for that name change. If there is not, then we can look
>>>> for a
>>>>>>>> better names for full image as well as base image.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Should we look into unifying the names for other image
>>>> recipes? Is
>>>>>>>> tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago"
>>>> images
>>>>>>> from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming
>>>> convention
>>>>>>> we use for our current images minus the one I created
>> this
>>>> patch for
>>>>>>> :). But I'm open to suggestions.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago
>> from
>>>> sdk.
>>>>>> Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be
>>>> exact.
>>>>>> Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
>>>>>> meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-
>> arago-
>>>> distro.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to
>> the
>>>> arago-
>>>>>> prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic
>> tradition
>>>> -
>>>>>> arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with
>> tisdk-
>>>> prefix,
>>>>>> but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as
>> it
>>>> was
>>>>>> forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's
>> no
>>>> need to call
>>>>> them rootfs.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect
>> time
>>>> to
>>>>>> align on the naming convention for our images and we don't
>>>> need to
>>>>>> stick to any of the existing names...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Franklin,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you think of a unified naming for all the images,
>> including
>>>> base and full
>>>>> tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that
>> is
>>>> scalable enough. As
>>>>> I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk-
>>>> image vs.
>>>>> simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus
>> it
>>>> has to work with
>>>>> your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
>>>> [Franklin]
>>>> 
>>>> How about the following:
>>>> 
>>>> tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed
>>>> image)
>>> 
>>> What will this image contain?
This contained everything that the below image contains minus SDK example applications, scripts and Matrix.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image
>>> 
>>> I want to differentiate between rootfs vs. sdk images.  So maybe
>> this one is
>>> arago-sdk-full-rootfs-image
>> 
>> Heh, I was the one who asked Franklin specifically to drop
>> "rootfs" part... :)
>> Please read the above explanation. For the most part, images are
>> rootfs. But I
>> see what you are saying - we now have these hybrid SDK images that
>> contain
>> other rootfs images, kernel/bootloader images and devkit(s). So,
>> how about we
>> clearly mark those instead of everything else with "rootfs"?
> 
> That works too
Overall I'm ok with this and Denys addressed the only comment I had.
> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-base-sdk-image
>>> 
>>> arago-sdk-base-rootfs-image
>>> 
>>>> arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image
>>> 
>>> Keep the same
>>> 
>>>> Tisdk-server-rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image
>>> 
>>> arago-sdk-server-rootfs-image
>>> 
>>> What do you think?
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on
>>>> meta-ti I think we could drop the "ti" from the image name to
>> make
>>>> it simpler.
>>>> Based on the above logic I would probably change our
>> packagegroups
>>>> from using tisdk and simply call it sdk.
>>>> But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the
>>>> packagegroups and images name.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Denys
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> meta-arago mailing list
>>>> meta-arago@arago-project.org
>>>> http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM
> To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> file system image
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
> > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
> > base file system image
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs
> > > > > > > > > > > images with
> > > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something
> > > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK
> > > > > > > setup...
> > > > > > > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the
> > > > > > > > > > original reasoning
> > > > > was.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script
> > > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the
> > > > > > > > > > full image as
> > > > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> > > > > > > > > c
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague
> > > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember what was
> > > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original
> > > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into
> > > > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is
> > > > > > > > used in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build
> > > > > > > > dependency and 2 to reference the image tarball. So the
> > > > > > > > assumption was that the recipe/package name was the same as the
> IMAGE_BASENAME.
> > > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > > > > > > must
> > > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class
> > > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing
> > > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe to have
> > > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME =
> > > > > "tisdk-rootfs":
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f1
> > > > > > > 6e
> > > > > > > c4a
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was
> > > > > > > in Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching the
> > > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change?
> > > > >
> > > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem
> > > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming
> > > > > > that the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem
> files.
> > > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> > > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem
> > > > > > tarballs were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> > > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused
> > > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look
> > > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of
> > > > > requirement for that name change. If there is not, then we can
> > > > > look for a better names for full image as well as base image.
> > > > >
> > > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes?
> > > > > Is
> > > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
> > >
> > > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" images
> > > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming
> > > > convention we use for our current images minus the one I created
> > > > this patch for :). But I'm open to suggestions.
> > >
> > > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from sdk.
> > > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be exact.
> > > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
> > >
> > > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
> > > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-distro.
> > >
> > > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the arago-
> > > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition -
> > > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk-
> > > prefix, but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as
> > > it was forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's
> > > no need to call
> > them rootfs.
> > >
> > > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time to
> > > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't need to
> > > stick to any of the existing names...
> >
> > Franklin,
> >
> > Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, including base
> > and full tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that
> > is scalable enough. As I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-
> tisdk-image vs.
> > simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus it has
> > to work with your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
> [Franklin]
> 
> How about the following:
> 
> tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed image)
> 
> tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-
> base-sdk-image arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image Tisdk-server-
> rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image
> 
> Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on meta-ti I think
> we could drop the "ti" from the image name to make it simpler.
> Based on the above logic I would probably change our packagegroups from
> using tisdk and simply call it sdk.
> But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the packagegroups and
> images name.
[Franklin] Thoughts?
> 
> >
> > --
> > Denys

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:55:13PM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM
> > To: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > Subject: RE: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base
> > file system image
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dmytriyenko, Denys
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM
> > > To: Cooper Jr., Franklin
> > > Cc: meta-arago@arago-project.org
> > > Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
> > > base file system image
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., Franklin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming rootfs
> > > > > > > > > > > > images with
> > > > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was something
> > > > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK
> > > > > > > > setup...
> > > > > > > > > > > [Franklin]
> > > > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what the
> > > > > > > > > > > original reasoning
> > > > > > was.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where some script
> > > > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it refers to the
> > > > > > > > > > > full image as
> > > > > > "tisdk-rootfs*"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about:
> > > > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2
> > > > > > > > > > c
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather vague
> > > > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember what was
> > > > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original
> > > > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into
> > > > > > tisdk-rootfs-image...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES variable is
> > > > > > > > > used in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build
> > > > > > > > > dependency and 2 to reference the image tarball. So the
> > > > > > > > > assumption was that the recipe/package name was the same as the
> > IMAGE_BASENAME.
> > > > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME
> > > > > > > > must
> > > > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the class
> > > > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. Tracing
> > > > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe to have
> > > > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME =
> > > > > > "tisdk-rootfs":
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta-
> > > > > > > > arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f1
> > > > > > > > 6e
> > > > > > > > c4a
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image recipe was
> > > > > > > > in Classic arago, but there it had the basename matching the
> > > > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the filesystem
> > > > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am assuming
> > > > > > > that the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed those filesystem
> > files.
> > > > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK
> > > > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two filesystem
> > > > > > > tarballs were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and
> > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I was focused
> > > > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it to look
> > > > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I had any other reason.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of
> > > > > > requirement for that name change. If there is not, then we can
> > > > > > look for a better names for full image as well as base image.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image recipes?
> > > > > > Is
> > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of?
> > > >
> > > > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" images
> > > > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming
> > > > > convention we use for our current images minus the one I created
> > > > > this patch for :). But I'm open to suggestions.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago from sdk.
> > > > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be exact.
> > > > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations.
> > > >
> > > > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into
> > > > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta-arago-distro.
> > > >
> > > > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to the arago-
> > > > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic tradition -
> > > > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with tisdk-
> > > > prefix, but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as
> > > > it was forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's
> > > > no need to call
> > > them rootfs.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect time to
> > > > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't need to
> > > > stick to any of the existing names...
> > >
> > > Franklin,
> > >
> > > Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, including base
> > > and full tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that
> > > is scalable enough. As I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-
> > tisdk-image vs.
> > > simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus it has
> > > to work with your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :)
> > [Franklin]
> > 
> > How about the following:
> > 
> > tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed image)
> > 
> > tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-
> > base-sdk-image arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image Tisdk-server-
> > rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image
> > 
> > Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on meta-ti I think
> > we could drop the "ti" from the image name to make it simpler.
> > Based on the above logic I would probably change our packagegroups from
> > using tisdk and simply call it sdk.
> > But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the packagegroups and
> > images name.
> [Franklin] Thoughts?

Yes, sorry, need bit more time...

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Maupin, Chase]

You will need to update the setup script as well right?  Because I think this would also match the expression used to find the rootfs used for the NFS setup

>-----Original Message-----
>From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
>bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
>Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
>To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
>Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
>base file system image
>
>* People are frequently confused by the difference in naming
>between the minimal
>  file system and the larger file system.
>* Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of
>the larger
>  file system.
>
>Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
>---
> ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> rename meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-
>image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} (87%)
>
>diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-
>tisdk-image.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-
>rootfs-base-image.bb
>similarity index 87%
>rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-
>tisdk-image.bb
>rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
>image.bb
>index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
>--- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
>image.bb
>+++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
>image.bb
>@@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
>     packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
>     "
>
>-export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
>+export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
>--
>1.7.0.4
>
>_______________________________________________
>meta-arago mailing list
>meta-arago@arago-project.org
>http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename base file system image

[Cooper Jr., Franklin]

Yep. There will be some changes that need to be made to various SDK and back end scripts

On Sep 17, 2013, at 5:30 PM, "Maupin, Chase" <chase.maupin@ti.com> wrote:

> You will need to update the setup script as well right?  Because I think this would also match the expression used to find the rootfs used for the NFS setup
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: meta-arago-bounces@arago-project.org [mailto:meta-arago-
>> bounces@arago-project.org] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 3:13 PM
>> To: meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin
>> Subject: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: Rename
>> base file system image
>> 
>> * People are frequently confused by the difference in naming
>> between the minimal
>> file system and the larger file system.
>> * Rename the minimal file system to mimic the naming convention of
>> the larger
>> file system.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Franklin S. Cooper Jr <fcooper@ti.com>
>> ---
>> ...e-tisdk-image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} |    2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>> rename meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/{arago-base-tisdk-
>> image.bb => tisdk-rootfs-base-image.bb} (87%)
>> 
>> diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-
>> tisdk-image.bb b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-
>> rootfs-base-image.bb
>> similarity index 87%
>> rename from meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-
>> tisdk-image.bb
>> rename to meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
>> image.bb
>> index 2c0e217..a3a9123 100644
>> --- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/arago-base-tisdk-
>> image.bb
>> +++ b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-core/images/tisdk-rootfs-base-
>> image.bb
>> @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ IMAGE_INSTALL += "\
>>    packagegroup-arago-base-tisdk \
>>    "
>> 
>> -export IMAGE_BASENAME = "arago-base-tisdk-image"
>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "tisdk-rootfs-base-image"
>> --
>> 1.7.0.4
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> meta-arago mailing list
>> meta-arago@arago-project.org
>> http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago