Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/6]qemuarm.conf: provide a common qemuarm machine configuration

[Bian Naimeng <biannm@cn.fujitsu.com>]

said the following on 2013-7-29 23:36:, Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 12:02 +0800, Bian Naimeng wrote:
>> qemux86.conf: provide a common qemux86 machine configuration, 
>> so developer/distributor can customize their specific one.
>>
>> Although, we can modify the meta/conf/machine/qemux86.conf to customize our 
>> configuration, but it's uncomfortable for developer/distributor maintaining
>> their branch.
>> After applying this patch, developer can tell poky using their machine
>> configuration by prepending their layer to BBPATH(Of course,
>> the bblayers.conf should be adapted to it).
> 
> I don't really understand the purpose of this patch.  Surely there is
> nothing to stop you from shipping an overlay qemux86.conf in some other
> layer today, right?  What exactly is the advantage of this extra
> indirection through an .inc file?
> 

What my purpose is that make it easy to implement the below case.
 1. I want inherit all the configuration item of qemux86.conf.
 2. I want add some new items to my qemux86.conf.
 3. If there're changes to qemux86.conf, i want merge them to my qemux86.conf

Yes, we can implement this case today.
 1. Copy the meta/conf/machine/qemux86.conf to my layer.
 2. Add new items to my qemux86.conf
 3. Rewrite my qemux86.conf to merge community changes.

However, if applying these patches, it becomes easy.
 1. add "require conf/machine/include/qemux86.inc" to my qemux86.conf
 2. add new items to my qemux86.conf
 3. modify qemux86.inc to update qemux86 configration at community, 
    so all community changes will be merged to my qemux86.conf automatically
    when merging the mainline.

> Also, as a side note, your patches 1/6, 2/6 and 6/6 all said
> "qemuarm.conf" in the subject lines but only the last of them actually
> contained changes to qemuarm.conf.

Sorry for my mistake. The correct one is following.
1/6: qemux86.conf.
2/6: qemux86-64.conf

> 
> Also also, the patches in this form are quite hard to follow.  Did you
> use "git format-patch -M" when creating them?

Yes, I used "git format-patch -M" to create them.
I will check them by linux/scripts/checkpatch.pl next time.

Thanks
 bian

> 
> p.
> 
>