From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from r-finger.com (r-finger.com [178.79.160.5]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF0DE01304 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:14:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (host86-170-68-253.range86-170.btcentralplus.com [86.170.68.253]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by r-finger.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E4B7D9C07 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:14:51 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4FEB69BB.2080906@r-finger.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:14:51 +0100 From: Tomas Frydrych User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.3) Gecko/20120329 Icedove/10.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" References: <10398861.esnekvBoZU@helios> <4FE9D965.4070906@linux.intel.com> <3153041.1FMPtSpq0x@helios> <4FE9E58C.9020408@r-finger.com> <4FE9EEF6.7050001@r-finger.com> <4FEA0505.6010108@am.sony.com> <4FEACDE6.7040701@r-finger.com> <83905E03-FF88-48EC-9336-273B02FB9FB1@beagleboard.org> In-Reply-To: <83905E03-FF88-48EC-9336-273B02FB9FB1@beagleboard.org> Subject: Re: the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:14:52 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Koen, On 27/06/12 15:59, Koen Kooi wrote: > Yocto is NOT a distro. Is that so? :-), meta-yocto distro.conf: DISTRO = "poky" DISTRO_NAME = "Yocto (Built by Poky 7.0)" DISTRO_VERSION = "1.2" I am well aware that textual meaning is pretty much constructed by the reader, and that authorial intent is an elusive concept, but I am ready to argue that the conventional understanding of the above is that Poky is a build tool, and Yocto is the public name of the distro that you build if you use meta-yocto. To read that as 'Yocto is NOT a distro' I think requires a definite pre-understanding that Yocto is not a distro, which would need to come from some other source (or perhaps it is an axiom of faith; myself, I tend hold firmly to the authority of the source code alone). I shall not deny you the right to hold to such a reading, but I do reserve the right to deconstruct it. :-) > This thread highlights the reason the oe folks have been pushing to get rid of the 'poky' name completely Perhaps one of the reasons; but then the erasure of Poky would mean that you could no longer say 'Yocto is a NOT a distro', which I suspect would achieve the very opposite of what you seek (and, perhaps more importantly, might cost Dave and Saul a lunch or two). Personally, I think much better solution would be if the distro was simply called Poky v7.0, then we could all say 'Yocto is NOT a distro!' with conviction. Plus Poky is such a lovely name, don't you think? ;-) Tomas