All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Mills <wmills@ti.com>
To: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: yocto beagleboard.conf -- should it not go away?
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:45:16 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5047657C.4010902@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1346849303.21985.56.camel@ted>



On 09/05/2012 08:48 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 10:43 +0100, Tomas Frydrych wrote:
>> On 05/09/12 10:15, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 05 September 2012 09:49:11 Tomas Frydrych wrote:
>>> It has been considered witin OE to be best practice to append to BBPATH and
>>> not prepend, the thinking being that then the search path matches the order of
>>> the layers listed in bblayers.conf rather than the reverse.
>>
>> Then meta-yocto should follow that convention ... and it needs to be
>> well documented, with the consequence of breaking that convention
>> explained, and the terrible punishments to come described in great and
>> sordid detail. Because this needs to be more than a convention, it needs
>> to be an article of faith.
>
> I just want to clarify something here.
>
> Its accepted that most layers will append to BBPATH. I do think its
> acceptable for a distro policy layer to prepend though and this is why
> meta-yocto does this. I don't remember the exact reason right now but
> the principle stands.

So how should we resolve the issue in meta-ti for the denzil/1.2 branch?

I think the expediency of prepending sounds right to me.  We can shoot 
for a better fix in 1.3.

>
> The root of the problem is that meta-yocto mixes up policy and hardware
> support which is bad. It also means its not compliant with the new Yocto
> Project compliance criteria and hence is not Yocto Project Compatible.
>
> Now we've got the compliance criteria sorted out there are some
> adjustments that need to be made and I will shortly be cleaving
> meta-yocto into two pieces to resolve this. I hadn't looked at this
> until now mainly in case there were changes to the criteria.
>
> FWIW I think this shows the strength of those criteria as by following
> them, we'd avoid a real world problem here.

I'm glad you are thinking of doing this.  I think it sets a good example 
and is cleaner.

However we will still need priority or namespace to override the 
beagleboard definition in the meta-yocto-bsp (or whatever) layer if it 
contains both the beagleboard reference and the atom-pc.


  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-05 14:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-03 20:06 yocto beagleboard.conf -- should it not go away? Tomas Frydrych
2012-09-03 20:15 ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-09-03 20:55   ` Tomas Frydrych
2012-09-03 21:08     ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-09-04  8:21       ` Jack Mitchell
2012-09-04 12:24         ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-09-05 22:03         ` Richard Purdie
2012-09-04  8:58       ` Tomas Frydrych
2012-09-04 12:20         ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-09-04 17:18           ` Darren Hart
2012-09-04 20:25             ` William Mills
2012-09-04 23:23               ` Darren Hart
2012-09-05 14:20                 ` William Mills
2012-09-05 14:42                   ` Darren Hart
2012-09-05 15:16                   ` Bruce Ashfield
2012-09-05 21:52                   ` Richard Purdie
2012-09-05  8:49               ` Tomas Frydrych
2012-09-05  9:15                 ` Paul Eggleton
2012-09-05  9:43                   ` Tomas Frydrych
2012-09-05 12:48                     ` Richard Purdie
2012-09-05 14:45                       ` William Mills [this message]
2012-09-05 15:06                         ` Tomas Frydrych
2012-09-05 15:44                         ` Richard Purdie
2012-09-05 19:34                       ` Martin Jansa
2012-09-05 21:43                       ` Richard Purdie
2012-09-05 14:39                   ` Darren Hart
2012-09-08  7:18               ` Khem Raj
2012-09-05 21:46         ` Richard Purdie
2012-09-06  5:39           ` Tomas Frydrych

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5047657C.4010902@ti.com \
    --to=wmills@ti.com \
    --cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=yocto@yoctoproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.