Re: linux-yocto: ktypes/tiny and some questions along the way

[Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>]

On 12/14/2011 10:43 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 11-12-14 01:07 PM, Darren Hart wrote:

Heavily trimmed down to the remaining points of discussion...

>> So what does that mean here? Well, I suggest we put all the sources in
>> standard (minus evil BSP patches obviously) and then create a ktype per
>> DISTRO definition:
> 
> And minus -rt at the moment.

Yes, sorry, I intended that, but didn't make that clear. Agreed.

>>
>> yocto/base
>> yocto/standard/base
>> yocto/standard/poky
>> yocto/standard/poky-rt
>> yocto/standard/poky-tiny
> 
> I'd want the distro not to be named in the branches, but yes,
> that looks ok to me.

Hrm, that's too bad. I really like the explicit coupling of the OE
distro definition to the linux-yocto branch. It helps reinforce the
concept of distro defined policy. I think I know where you are coming
from though.

> Yep, I'm not sold on a distro name, but if you change this to:
> 
>        yocto/base
>        yocto/standard/cfg (bad name, but I wanted something)
>        yocto/standard/rt
>        yocto/standard/tiny

How about:
        yocto/base
        yocto/standard/default
        yocto/standard/rt
        yocto/standard/tiny

"default" makes sense to me since, well, it is what we would use as the
default if no specification in made. Also, it's a shorter way of saying
"general purpose", which describes this policy/config fairly well.

> Then the tree is more of a common base ... they are just names after
> all! We already have 'yocto' in there, so that's enough specifics for
> my taste.
> 
> or we flip it around ...
> 
>     base
>     standard/yocto
>     standard/yocto-rt
>     standard/yocto-tiny
> 
> Which looks more like what you proposed, but without the double
> specific names.

It's less typing! I like less typing. But if we're going to do that, why
not:

     base
     standard/poky
     standard/poky-rt
     standard/poky-tiny

If you would prefer to keep the branches build-system/distro agnostic,
then I think the ideal would be:


     base
     standard/default
     standard/rt
     standard/tiny

And, it's even LESS typing! Fingers, wrists, and keyboards everywhere
will be thanking us. ;-)

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel