* Using yocto/standard by default
@ 2011-12-13 23:46 Darren Hart
2011-12-14 5:27 ` Bruce Ashfield
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Darren Hart @ 2011-12-13 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yocto Project, Ashfield, Bruce, Zanussi, Tom
We hit another lock-step SRCREV bug earlier on the FRI2 BSP. This was
due mostly to my pushing the efi changes to meta-intel too early - but,
it highlights a maintenance step that I believe could be eliminated for
most boards.
We have a yocto/standard/fri2 branch, but it doesn't contain any
additional changes over yocto/standard/base. If we were to make
yocto/standard/base the default for KBRANCH, shouldn't we be able to
eliminate all the BSP branches that are identical to
yocto/standard/base? This would significantly reduce the number of
SRCREV updates that are required and likely reduce the number of
Autobuilder failures we experience as a result. Seems like it would also
help make the git tree easier to deal with.
Any opinions here?
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Using yocto/standard by default
2011-12-13 23:46 Using yocto/standard by default Darren Hart
@ 2011-12-14 5:27 ` Bruce Ashfield
2011-12-14 5:48 ` Darren Hart
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Ashfield @ 2011-12-14 5:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Darren Hart; +Cc: Yocto Project
On 11-12-13 6:46 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> We hit another lock-step SRCREV bug earlier on the FRI2 BSP. This was
> due mostly to my pushing the efi changes to meta-intel too early - but,
> it highlights a maintenance step that I believe could be eliminated for
> most boards.
>
> We have a yocto/standard/fri2 branch, but it doesn't contain any
> additional changes over yocto/standard/base. If we were to make
> yocto/standard/base the default for KBRANCH, shouldn't we be able to
> eliminate all the BSP branches that are identical to
> yocto/standard/base? This would significantly reduce the number of
> SRCREV updates that are required and likely reduce the number of
> Autobuilder failures we experience as a result. Seems like it would also
> help make the git tree easier to deal with.
>
> Any opinions here?
It's a valid config, and something that works now. So there's no
reason to not use it. New branches can be created IF a board really
does need to merge conflicting patches. The emgd stuff was a problem
and required branches, but if we have nothing like that, squashing the
branches is a nice simplification.
Cheers,
Bruce
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Using yocto/standard by default
2011-12-14 5:27 ` Bruce Ashfield
@ 2011-12-14 5:48 ` Darren Hart
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Darren Hart @ 2011-12-14 5:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Ashfield; +Cc: Yocto Project
On 12/13/2011 09:27 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 11-12-13 6:46 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>> We hit another lock-step SRCREV bug earlier on the FRI2 BSP. This was
>> due mostly to my pushing the efi changes to meta-intel too early - but,
>> it highlights a maintenance step that I believe could be eliminated for
>> most boards.
>>
>> We have a yocto/standard/fri2 branch, but it doesn't contain any
>> additional changes over yocto/standard/base. If we were to make
>> yocto/standard/base the default for KBRANCH, shouldn't we be able to
>> eliminate all the BSP branches that are identical to
>> yocto/standard/base? This would significantly reduce the number of
>> SRCREV updates that are required and likely reduce the number of
>> Autobuilder failures we experience as a result. Seems like it would also
>> help make the git tree easier to deal with.
>>
>> Any opinions here?
>
> It's a valid config, and something that works now. So there's no
> reason to not use it. New branches can be created IF a board really
> does need to merge conflicting patches. The emgd stuff was a problem
> and required branches, but if we have nothing like that, squashing the
> branches is a nice simplification.
>
Hrm maybe I missed that in the fri2 branches. It does need emgd, so I'll
double check that.
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-12-14 5:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-12-13 23:46 Using yocto/standard by default Darren Hart
2011-12-14 5:27 ` Bruce Ashfield
2011-12-14 5:48 ` Darren Hart
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.