From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UNgzx-0007WE-Tk for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 12:02:26 +0200 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UNgji-0006ln-EJ for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:45:38 +0200 Received: from ip4da2a5ae.direct-adsl.nl ([77.162.165.174]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:45:38 +0200 Received: from koen by ip4da2a5ae.direct-adsl.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:45:38 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:45:00 +0200 Message-ID: References: <515C5DE6.6040702@pseudoterminal.org> <515C7D42.6070303@pseudoterminal.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip4da2a5ae.direct-adsl.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 In-Reply-To: <515C7D42.6070303@pseudoterminal.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5 Subject: Re: New meta-cubox layer X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 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: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:02:38 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Op 03-04-13 21:04, Carlos Rafael Giani schreef: > On 2013-04-03 20:38, Koen Kooi wrote: >> So how is this different from https://github.com/naguirre/meta-cubox ? > > I am in contact with the author of that layer. My work started as a fork > of that, since the layer did not work for me, but since I anyway was > changing pretty much all of it from the ground up, I decided to start my > own. Now, covers more features of the CuBox, and supports both soft- and > hardfp in all recipes. > >> >> Just like https://github.com/naguirre/meta-cubox you're mixing DISTRO >> policy in the machine files by setting the tuning to hardfloat. Don't >> do that. If you want hardfloat, set that in your distro config, not in >> your machine config. > > Do I understand it correctly that I should drop "marvellpj4hf" from > https://github.com/dv1/meta-cubox/blob/master/conf/machine/include/tune-marvell-pj4.inc > > , or at least not set it as DEFAULTTUNE, not even with the ?= operation, and > just use "marvellpj4" instead ? Because it is the distros decision to add > the "callconvention-hard" feature? Exactly! > The reason I ask that is because when I was writing the tune, I stumbled > upon > https://github.com/openembedded/oe-core/blob/master/meta/conf/machine/include/arm/arch-armv7a.inc > > , which includes armv7a, armv7ahf . This confuses me. Why is it OK there to > mix in the callconvention? It isn't, that file just lists all the permutiations available. > Finally, is there a way to give a distro a "hint" about what is preferred > for a machine (soft/hardfp)? One that the distro is free to ignore or > respect? There isn't, apart from a note in the README of your BSP. regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iD8DBQFRXUucMkyGM64RGpERAlQFAKCpia9xhA+ldV8AdpH2F3GWAkptQwCgsCcd 2Tz5vaOMU9oX93XPNmAZE/E= =fR8B -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----