From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.webfaction.com (mail6.webfaction.com [74.55.86.74]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F456E01404 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 06:32:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (c-68-46-169-75.hsd1.nj.comcast.net [68.46.169.75]) by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C304D2083451; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:32:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <512F6A96.8050102@mindchasers.com> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:32:54 -0500 From: Bob Cochran User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130221 Thunderbird/17.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: McClintock Matthew-B29882 References: <512E67D4.8060600@mindchasers.com> <70CC66F5C30A414DADDA6973E4CA391A8935DD@039-SN1MPN1-001.039d.mgd.msft.net> <70CC66F5C30A414DADDA6973E4CA391A893604@039-SN1MPN1-001.039d.mgd.msft.net> In-Reply-To: <70CC66F5C30A414DADDA6973E4CA391A893604@039-SN1MPN1-001.039d.mgd.msft.net> Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" , "yocto@linux.freescale.net" , Otavio Salvador Subject: Re: Please review the proposal of FSL Yocto layers reorg X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:32:57 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/27/2013 04:07 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Otavio Salvador > wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:57 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Bob Cochran wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> The FSL Yocto layers reorg proposal is attached, can you please take a >>>>> look? Any comment and suggestion is welcome and appreciated. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks Zhenhua. I have a few questions and comments about your slides. >>>> >>>> *** Slide 2: "Move all FSL specific layers to totally open source, or as >>>> much as possible" >>>> >>>> I'm all for this. Will this include your PowerPC Linux Tree? I didn't see >>>> mention of this in your slides. This can be found today on your public git, >>>> but it hasn't been updated in months. >>>> >>>> I assume there's lots of kernel activity (as can be witnessed on the >>>> linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org list), so I'm assuming an internal Linux tree >>>> is being patched often. It would be great to be able to see your Linux tree >>>> patched as issues are being discussed & resolved on yocto & ozlabs mail >>>> lists. >>> >>> We work on the upstream tree and also release an SDK kernel tree >>> that's fully tested. The layers tend to use the latter since it >>> supports all features. Nothing stopping users from adding a version >>> using the upstream tree. >> >> And from now on, what are the plans? > > Same using SDK kernel release, I don't think the kernel team will ever > have everything upstreamed for an SDK release and supporting all > feature and bug fixes. Besides we will pick a kernel and test and fix > it so it will always fall out of sync. (e.g. latest kernel release - 1 > release + fixes) > >> >>>> **** Slide 3: "FSL Layers maintained in git.am.freescale.net, >>>> gitfrescale.com, and git.yoctoproject.org" >>>> >>>> Is your goal to have these layers in sync? Today, I can find a meta-fsl-ppc >>>> layer on yoctoproject and at git.freescale.com. However, they are not in >>>> sync, and I have no idea why one is patched and one isn't. >>> >>> They are somewhat in sync. That's today. What about next week or next month? As Zhenhua develops the revised Yocto layer strategy, I ask that he clarifies the policy on how the same named tree on different servers will be maintained. The ones on git.freescale.com are still >>> denzil based for the last SDK release. Ones on git.yoctoproject.org >>> are newer and include danny and master branches as well. >> >> And what are the plans regarding the SDK? Can we get a statement in the Yocto layers reorg doc on how each SDK branch will be maintained between SDK releases? As a developer working to get products out the door, will I view the patched SDK branch (between releases) as a bug fixed SDK or as an experimental branch for the next SDK release? > > These should be much closer to the same going forward (ideally > anyways) if not identically esp. for the layers we control, however we > can't always get all fixes in the oe-core/poky for an SDK release. But > a lot of times we can get them into the branch for that release and > eventually a point release. > > -M > _______________________________________________ > meta-freescale mailing list > meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale >