From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] busybox: enable mdev by default
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 17:37:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1307032661.27470.581.camel@rex> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=q-bMwYtjTAqAXeaB4QQ_n85y8Rw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 20:40 +0000, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 20:37, Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 20:09 +0000, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> -# CONFIG_MDEV is not set
> >> +CONFIG_MDEV=y
> >
> > Per previous discussion, I am still uneasy about this change. I think
> > we really need some sort of coherent policy for what exactly the default
> > busybox configuration in oe-core is meant to be doing, and then (if
> > necessary) a set of patches to make it match the policy. Just flipping
> > random features on and off does not seem like a good way to proceed.
>
> OE-core has support to mdev as device handling mechanism as such this
> ought to be enabled by default IMO.
>
> Personally it doesn't matter since I have already overriden it in my
> internal layer.
I'm afraid I'm with Phil on this. I don't like the idea of enabling
something we don't actually use. This really needs to become some kind
of configure option which would at the same time disable/replace udev so
the patch in its currently form isn't acceptable.
Cheers,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-02 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-01 20:09 [PATCH 0/3] Patches pending on O.S. Systems tree Otavio Salvador
2011-06-01 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] busybox: enable mdev by default Otavio Salvador
2011-06-01 20:37 ` Phil Blundell
2011-06-01 20:40 ` Otavio Salvador
2011-06-02 16:37 ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2011-06-02 16:40 ` Otavio Salvador
2011-06-03 1:06 ` Khem Raj
2011-06-03 6:37 ` Koen Kooi
2011-06-03 8:24 ` Richard Purdie
2011-06-03 8:59 ` Koen Kooi
2011-06-03 9:50 ` Richard Purdie
2011-06-03 10:42 ` Koen Kooi
2011-06-03 9:57 ` Phil Blundell
2011-06-01 20:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] qmake_base.bbclass: fix lrelease/lupdate binary names Otavio Salvador
2011-06-02 16:51 ` Paul Eggleton
2011-06-02 17:27 ` Richard Purdie
2011-06-01 20:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] gnutls: link against 'dl' library Otavio Salvador
2011-06-01 20:33 ` Phil Blundell
2011-06-01 20:39 ` Otavio Salvador
2011-06-01 20:53 ` Phil Blundell
2011-06-01 21:00 ` Otavio Salvador
2011-06-01 21:43 ` Saul Wold
2011-06-01 21:52 ` Martin Jansa
2011-06-01 22:19 ` Saul Wold
2011-06-02 6:31 ` Martin Jansa
2011-06-02 9:29 ` Koen Kooi
2011-06-02 9:38 ` Richard Purdie
2011-06-02 11:00 ` [PATCH] gnutls: add --with-libdl-prefix and --with-libpthread-prefix Martin Jansa
2011-06-02 13:53 ` Richard Purdie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1307032661.27470.581.camel@rex \
--to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox