From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9bS-0001pg-B8 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 15:37:26 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4BDYeQi019833 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 14:34:40 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 18989-06 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 14:34:36 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4BDYWV1019827 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 14:34:32 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <8941115E-22C9-45BD-90EE-4F8A1936AF54@dominion.thruhere.net> References: <6a6f3589dba7aff0cb89f233807e5d051d8d3e08.1305035617.git.richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> <1305104979.30391.310.camel@rex> <1305113041.30391.347.camel@rex> <8941115E-22C9-45BD-90EE-4F8A1936AF54@dominion.thruhere.net> Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 14:34:27 +0100 Message-ID: <1305120867.30391.353.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] bitbake.conf: Include the new default-providers.inc and default-versions.inc files X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 13:37:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 13:43 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > Op 11 mei 2011, om 13:24 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > > > On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 12:08 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >> Op 11 mei 2011, om 11:09 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > >> > >>> On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 16:20 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >>>> Op 10 mei 2011, om 16:00 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > >>>>> +++ b/meta/conf/distro/include/default-providers.inc > >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > >>>>> > >>>>> +PREFERRED_PROVIDER_gconf ?= "gconf-dbus" > >>>> > >>>> the dbus port has long been merged upstream, so proper gconf would be > >>>> a better choice. We could ignore it and just use dconf in meta-gnome, > >>>> though ;) > >>> > >>> I agree we should be using gconf, could someone send me the recipe > >>> though? ;-). > >> > >> I think we want to keep gconf in meta-gnome and pull the dependants out of oe-core > > > > We have a slight dependency conflict here as we've said we want sato in > > OECore so we have something we can actually test. > > > > Are we now saying sato also needs to be separated out into its own > > layer? > > I think that's the best way forward. > > > Or can we define meta-gnome as being the gnome pieces without direct > > requirements in OECore for a minimal gtk desktop? > > If it's using gconf, it's not a minimal gtk desktop anymore. I see the > point in having something like sato in oe-core, but I don't think > that's worth having gconf(-dbus) in oe-core. But this is a different > discussion, since there are other things that can use gconf (e.g. > gstreamer) in oe-core, which we would need to take a look at. It could be argued that gtk with no way to store settings is a little useless. I'm in favour of having the core graphics testable so I'm not 100% convinced of your argument above. It certainly goes against the viewpoint that came out of the TSC meetings so we need further discussion. In the meantime, replacing gconf-dbus with gconf would seem to move us closer to where we want to be overall. > Let's get your distro set merged and then improve on it. Done :) Cheers, Richard