From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SGBr2-0006Sg-7T for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:17:40 +0200 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Apr 2012 09:08:24 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="138550182" Received: from unknown (HELO envy.home) ([10.255.12.143]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Apr 2012 09:08:23 -0700 Message-ID: <4F7F14D0.1060408@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:44 -0700 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120209 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Cui, Dexuan" References: <4F7E6914.7080908@linux.intel.com> <4F7E881E.1000106@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: Do we have a package that installs the kernel headers and config into the target? X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:17:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 04/06/2012 04:12 AM, Cui, Dexuan wrote: > Cui, Dexuan wrote on 2012-04-06: >> Darren Hart wrote on 2012-04-06: >>> On 04/05/2012 09:41 PM, Cui, Dexuan wrote: >>> While I understand there are valid use cases, I think this is generally >>> contrary to workflow of the project. We build the OS, it runs on the >>> target. This is building a general purpose OS, and then having it build >>> itself out more. It doesn't feel like an embedded workflow. > BTW, my question might be simplified as: > If we strictly follow the rule the target OS shouldn't build itself out > more, why do we supply a recipe core-image-sato-sdk.bb that can > create an image with tools-sdk that includes development tools > like gcc? :-) > > Or, while we recommend the common embedded workflow, we > also somewhat support (or tolerate) the way "the target builds > itself out more"? > Yup, agree. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel