meta-ti vs meta-texasinstruments

meta-ti vs meta-texasinstruments

[Gary Thomas]

Why are there two layers, each seemingly providing support for
TI products (boards, tools, etc)?  They have a great overlap,
but many differences...

Shouldn't there only be one such layer?  As is, the meta-texasinstruments
one seems to be rather out of date, but I'm not sure.

n.b. I stumbled across this while looking at the u-boot-fw-utils
package which is referred to in meta-ti, but only created by
meta-texasinstruments.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: meta-ti vs meta-texasinstruments

[Enrico]

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:
> Why are there two layers, each seemingly providing support for
> TI products (boards, tools, etc)?  They have a great overlap,
> but many differences...
>
> Shouldn't there only be one such layer?  As is, the meta-texasinstruments
> one seems to be rather out of date, but I'm not sure.

url of these layers? Maybe it's just an old reference in your setup
that is not getting updated (previously it was called
meta-texasinstruments and then it became meta-ti).

Enrico

Re: meta-ti vs meta-texasinstruments

[Gary Thomas]

On 2012-03-06 06:19, Enrico wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Gary Thomas<gary@mlbassoc.com>  wrote:
>> Why are there two layers, each seemingly providing support for
>> TI products (boards, tools, etc)?  They have a great overlap,
>> but many differences...
>>
>> Shouldn't there only be one such layer?  As is, the meta-texasinstruments
>> one seems to be rather out of date, but I'm not sure.
>
> url of these layers? Maybe it's just an old reference in your setup
> that is not getting updated (previously it was called
> meta-texasinstruments and then it became meta-ti).

Indeed, the meta-texasinstruments one may just be left over chaff.

That said, where is u-boot-fw-utils (assuming not meta-texasinstruments)?
A quick find in angstrom/sources shows
   ./meta-ti/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_2011.12.bb:RRECOMMENDS_${PN}_beagleboard = "u-boot-fw-utils"
   ./meta-ti/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot_git.bb:RRECOMMENDS_${PN}_omap3-touchbook = "u-boot-fw-utils"

   ./meta-texasinstruments/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:PACKAGES += "${PN}-fw-utils"
   ./meta-texasinstruments/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:FILES_${PN}-fw-utils = "${sysconfdir} ${base_sbindir}"

   ./meta-openpandora/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:PACKAGES += "${PN}-fw-utils"
   ./meta-openpandora/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:FILES_${PN}-fw-utils = "${sysconfdir} ${base_sbindir}"
   ./meta-openpandora/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:INSANE_SKIP_${PN}-fw-utils = True

   ./meta-efikamx/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:PACKAGES += "${PN}-fw-utils"
   ./meta-efikamx/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:FILES_${PN}-fw-utils = "${sysconfdir} ${base_sbindir}"
   ./meta-efikamx/recipes-bsp/u-boot/u-boot.inc:INSANE_SKIP_${PN}-fw-utils = "1"

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: meta-ti vs meta-texasinstruments

[Koen Kooi]

Op 6 mrt. 2012, om 14:35 heeft Gary Thomas het volgende geschreven:

> On 2012-03-06 06:19, Enrico wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Gary Thomas<gary@mlbassoc.com>  wrote:
>>> Why are there two layers, each seemingly providing support for
>>> TI products (boards, tools, etc)?  They have a great overlap,
>>> but many differences...
>>> 
>>> Shouldn't there only be one such layer?  As is, the meta-texasinstruments
>>> one seems to be rather out of date, but I'm not sure.
>> 
>> url of these layers? Maybe it's just an old reference in your setup
>> that is not getting updated (previously it was called
>> meta-texasinstruments and then it became meta-ti).
> 
> Indeed, the meta-texasinstruments one may just be left over chaff.
> 
> That said, where is u-boot-fw-utils (assuming not meta-texasinstruments)?

Hmm, let's look at the README and the layers it lists as requirements and take the first one, oe-core:

http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=4a2543c0641f1df6d74c18cfe0c3ac3cfd50e60c

Re: meta-ti vs meta-texasinstruments

[Gary Thomas]

On 2012-03-06 06:39, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 6 mrt. 2012, om 14:35 heeft Gary Thomas het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On 2012-03-06 06:19, Enrico wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Gary Thomas<gary@mlbassoc.com>   wrote:
>>>> Why are there two layers, each seemingly providing support for
>>>> TI products (boards, tools, etc)?  They have a great overlap,
>>>> but many differences...
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't there only be one such layer?  As is, the meta-texasinstruments
>>>> one seems to be rather out of date, but I'm not sure.
>>>
>>> url of these layers? Maybe it's just an old reference in your setup
>>> that is not getting updated (previously it was called
>>> meta-texasinstruments and then it became meta-ti).
>>
>> Indeed, the meta-texasinstruments one may just be left over chaff.
>>
>> That said, where is u-boot-fw-utils (assuming not meta-texasinstruments)?
>
> Hmm, let's look at the README and the layers it lists as requirements and take the first one, oe-core:
>
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=4a2543c0641f1df6d74c18cfe0c3ac3cfd50e60c

Which was missed by my simple search of "fw-utils" _inside_ the recipes, not
the recipe names themselves.

Thanks

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------