* [RFC] u-boot recipe naming
@ 2012-01-20 12:41 Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 14:07 ` Andreas Müller
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2012-01-20 12:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: meta-ti
Hi,
We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot recipes as well:
u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g. u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb
This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
Thoughts/flames/opinions?
regards,
Koen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [RFC] u-boot recipe naming
2012-01-20 12:41 [RFC] u-boot recipe naming Koen Kooi
@ 2012-01-20 14:07 ` Andreas Müller
2012-01-20 14:20 ` Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 15:39 ` Tom Rini
2012-01-20 17:10 ` Philip Balister
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Müller @ 2012-01-20 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: meta-ti
On Friday, January 20, 2012 01:41:51 PM Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version
> of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the
> future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot
> recipes as well:
>
> u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
> u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
> u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g.
> u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb
>
> This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it
> clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
>
> Thoughts/flames/opinions?
>
> regards,
>
> Koen
Additional: How about exceeding the u-boot.inc ( linux.inc too? ) filenames by
the layer name they live in, so other layers don't need to copy & paste (
happend yesterday after meta-ettus fallout - know it is worked around now ).
Andreas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] u-boot recipe naming
2012-01-20 14:07 ` Andreas Müller
@ 2012-01-20 14:20 ` Koen Kooi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2012-01-20 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Müller; +Cc: meta-ti
Op 20 jan. 2012, om 15:07 heeft Andreas Müller het volgende geschreven:
> On Friday, January 20, 2012 01:41:51 PM Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version
>> of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the
>> future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot
>> recipes as well:
>>
>> u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
>> u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
>> u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g.
>> u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb
>>
>> This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it
>> clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
>>
>> Thoughts/flames/opinions?
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Koen
> Additional: How about exceeding the u-boot.inc ( linux.inc too? ) filenames by
> the layer name they live in, so other layers don't need to copy & paste (
> happend yesterday after meta-ettus fallout - know it is worked around now ).
I would suggest moving those into meta-oe and making then raise priority in meta-oe. Or just not using .inc files :(
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] u-boot recipe naming
2012-01-20 12:41 [RFC] u-boot recipe naming Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 14:07 ` Andreas Müller
@ 2012-01-20 15:39 ` Tom Rini
2012-01-20 16:40 ` Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 17:10 ` Philip Balister
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2012-01-20 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Koen Kooi; +Cc: meta-ti
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot recipes as well:
>
> u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
> u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
> u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g. u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb
>
> This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
>
> Thoughts/flames/opinions?
Works for me, but I do hope we need u-boot-ti_git.bb sparingly as I'm
just using that for requests for Albert to pull into u-boot-arm (it's
possible that stuff might stay in 'next' for a while, ie when merge
window closes but I don't want to lose stuff) so please make sure it's
marked as a rebasing git tree.
--
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] u-boot recipe naming
2012-01-20 15:39 ` Tom Rini
@ 2012-01-20 16:40 ` Koen Kooi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Koen Kooi @ 2012-01-20 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini; +Cc: meta-ti
Op 20 jan. 2012, om 16:39 heeft Tom Rini het volgende geschreven:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot recipes as well:
>>
>> u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
>> u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
>> u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g. u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb
>>
>> This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
>>
>> Thoughts/flames/opinions?
>
> Works for me, but I do hope we need u-boot-ti_git.bb sparingly as I'm
> just using that for requests for Albert to pull into u-boot-arm (it's
> possible that stuff might stay in 'next' for a while, ie when merge
> window closes but I don't want to lose stuff) so please make sure it's
> marked as a rebasing git tree.
It was only mean as an example to illustrate the namespace, if we don't need it, it's one less recipe to support :)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC] u-boot recipe naming
2012-01-20 12:41 [RFC] u-boot recipe naming Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 14:07 ` Andreas Müller
2012-01-20 15:39 ` Tom Rini
@ 2012-01-20 17:10 ` Philip Balister
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Philip Balister @ 2012-01-20 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Koen Kooi; +Cc: meta-ti
On 01/20/2012 07:41 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot recipes as well:
>
> u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
> u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
> u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g. u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb
Since I kind of started the problem, some background....
I'm very nervous using a shared u-boot recipe to ship to customers,
since there always seems to be some regression creeping in as other
people fix things for their hardware (the recent L2 cache turn off for
omap3 to fix omap4 booting comes to mind).
So I want to control my u-boot with an iron fist!
But, I tried to be lazy and not pollute the u-boot package namespace by
calling the recipe u-boot-usrp-e1xx. Apparently this did not work so well :)
Philip
>
> This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
>
> Thoughts/flames/opinions?
>
> regards,
>
> Koen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-01-20 17:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-01-20 12:41 [RFC] u-boot recipe naming Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 14:07 ` Andreas Müller
2012-01-20 14:20 ` Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 15:39 ` Tom Rini
2012-01-20 16:40 ` Koen Kooi
2012-01-20 17:10 ` Philip Balister
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.