From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933A46F33F for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:17:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s1OHH8TT019801 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:17:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from Marks-MacBook-Pro.local (172.25.36.235) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.347.0; Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:17:07 -0800 Message-ID: <530B7E92.9090109@windriver.com> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:17:06 -0600 From: Mark Hatle Organization: Wind River Systems User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <52C0CDD6.4030904@windriver.com> <5014991.yOqVctVWSl@helios> <19353110.0dHagEzKPJ@peggleto-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com> <1393261200.31769.17.camel@ted> In-Reply-To: <1393261200.31769.17.camel@ted> Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/38] *-basic: rename to *-standardlinux X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:17:11 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2/24/14, 11:00 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 16:38 +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: >> On Monday 30 December 2013 12:59:26 Paul Eggleton wrote: >>> On Monday 30 December 2013 09:35:18 Robert Yang wrote: >>>> I'm afraid that the standardlinux maybe a little confused with >>>> linuxstdbase, bu I don't have any better idea about it. >>> >>> You could be right. I've thought for a long time about renaming this and >>> haven't been able to come up with anything better. On the other hand, in our >>> current configuration we are actually using the basic/standardlinux >>> packagegroup as part of our LSB images; although that might not be the >>> right thing to continue doing - LSB probably ought to be independent. >>> >>> FWIW, let's consider this particular patch as RFC, maybe someone else has a >>> better idea of what to name it. I am very much convinced that "basic" is not >>> the right name though. >> >> So, has anyone got any better ideas for the name of core-image-basic and >> packagegroup-core-basic? >> >> The idea is that these are meant to contain things that you might have on a >> more traditional or full-featured Linux system. Somehow "-traditionallinux" >> doesn't really work either. > > "fulllinux"? > > "linuxcmdline"? I've resolved this naming conundrum in the past by simply having a document that explains what the name means. "basic - basic command line utilities" I agree basic isn't the most descriptive name, but I'm not sure what is. --Mark > Cheers, > > Richard > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >