From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.chez-thomas.org (mail.mlbassoc.com [65.100.170.105]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E698E007A0 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 05:16:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix, from userid 1998) id C4230F811DE; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 06:16:53 -0700 (MST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on hermes.chez-thomas.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, FREEMAIL_FROM, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 Received: from [192.168.1.114] (zeus [192.168.1.114]) by mail.chez-thomas.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D295F811DC; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 06:16:53 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <529F2B6C.6020402@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 06:17:32 -0700 From: Gary Thomas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org References: <529F1EFE.9080600@mlbassoc.com> In-Reply-To: <529F1EFE.9080600@mlbassoc.com> Subject: Re: i.MX6Q VPU firmware missing for core-image-basic 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: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:16:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2013-12-04 05:24, Gary Thomas wrote: > On 2013-12-04 05:13, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Tarek El-Sherbiny >> wrote: >>> I mad some progress now. >>> >>> core-imgae-base ---> VPU FW is included. >>> core-imgae-basic ---> VPU FW is not included. !!!!? >>> >>> Does anyone understand why? >>> >>> I know that the firmware is picked up in MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable >>> but I don't know why it affects only core-imgae-base and not >>> core-imgae-basic ! >>> >>> Hope someone could shed some light here. >> >> core-image-base: A console-only image that fully supports the target >> device hardware. >> ... >> core-image-basic: A console-only image with more full-featured Linux >> system functionality installed. >> >> The image names are misleading, I agree. Please bring this to OE-Core >> for discussion. >> > > I sent a patch for this to OE-core in October which seems to have > been ignored :-( > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2013-October/085750.html > BTW, the patch has been applied to OE-core master, but not the dora branch.