Re: [PATCH 1/3] matrix-gui-browser: port from arago overlay

[Philip Balister <philip@balister.org>]

On 01/27/2012 03:24 PM, William Mills wrote:
> 
.....


>>> can
>>> agree to spliting meta-ti into two layers, a HW layer for our devices
>>> and a
>>> layer containing all of the TI recipes.
>>>
>>> But if we wanted to match the meta-intel layer way would you also
>>> propose
>>> making a layer per device?  I personally find that more confusing.
>> I don't think that was Bill's message. It was simplicity. BSP only
>> layer, no
>> supplemental apps, if not absolutely required.
>>
>> Your example with lmbench is not correct - BSP layer should be simple
>> enough
>> to be used with OE-Core alone to produce a console rootfs image with
>> nothing
>> but busybox.
>>
>> How about splitting meta-ti into:
>> * BSP only
>> * SGX graphics
>> * DSP tools
>> * WiFi etc.
>>
>> And then splitting meta-arago into:
>> * Arago distro for TI SDKs
>> * Supplemental apps
>>
> 
> Need to get my "YES!" in here before everyone barfs all over the
> proposal :)
> 
> Chase: your right.  I do not want to follow intel's example of layer per
> BSP.

I build stuff for the USRP E100 (based on a gumstic overo). I use my own
later for BSP that provides kernel, u-boot, and image recipes.

I still need a TI BSP layer for DSP stuff (we do not care about SGX,
although it is possible customers could).

Do forget your customers using all this to ship products.

Philip