From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JfB7G-0000EI-0r for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:43:18 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JfB7D-00022q-Lw for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:43:15 +0000 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:43:15 +0000 Received: from koen by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:43:15 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:43:08 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1206638249.4514.57.camel@dax.rpnet.com> <47EC2661.90702@bolloretelecom.eu> <20080327230928.GD11881@smtp.west.cox.net> <1206696033.5029.9.camel@dax.rpnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213) In-Reply-To: <1206696033.5029.9.camel@dax.rpnet.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Sender: news Subject: Re: ipkg/opkg offical response X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:43:18 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Richard Purdie schreef: | On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 01:30 +0100, Leon Woestenberg wrote: |> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:09 AM, Tom Rini wrote: |>> I'll ask the silly qustion. Given that mkimage hasn't changed in I |>> don't know how long, why are both providing it? Just to save on sources |>> downloaded? Did OM really change mkimage? |>> |> Good question, thanks for asking! |> |> In fact, I have seen some of the kernel recipes seen switching between |> openmoko's and non-openmoko u-boot-tools, with and without breakage in |> the past. |> |> Could the openmoko guys please describe what grants their version to exist? :-) | | As far as I know, the mkimage tool hasn't changed in a long time so we | should be able to share one common version. The only difference is the number of archs it supports, IIRC bfin and avr32 may require $vendor mkimage since upstream doesn't support those yet (again, IIRC). | Using a simpler recipe kind | of makes sense but I'll let the openmoko people answer. The openmoko people have very little to do with openmoko-mkimage, they try to remove it every now and then and I yell at them for that :) I created that since _all_ existing uboot recipes were either machine specific or plain broken. So I created a frozen openmoko-mkimage (all patches are in OE, SRC_URI fixed to certain rev, etc) that is known to work and doesn't break. So if the (new) mkimage-native recipe is generic and non-broken, we should switch to that. | One way forward might be to DEPEND on virtual/mkimage-native. The | various uboot providers can then PROVIDE this and it becomes distro | policy which one is selected? If someone spends some time to teach mkimage about avr32 (might already be upstream) there shouldn't be a need for virtual/mkimage-native IMO. regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFH7L2sMkyGM64RGpERAptVAJ9UPo2nH5k61Wgq7SZcz0cENJ3lFQCeNZLa EqAOJ0uyuvpWqadGjYRTCaI= =AkT1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----