From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-out.m-online.net (mail-out.m-online.net [212.18.0.9]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D90836058D for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 23:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from frontend01.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.182]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40Zgky0Xvkz1qtdw; Tue, 1 May 2018 01:30:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (dynscan1.mnet-online.de [192.168.6.70]) by mail.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40Zgky00zMz1qqxG; Tue, 1 May 2018 01:30:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mnet-online.de Received: from mail.mnet-online.de ([192.168.8.182]) by localhost (dynscan1.mail.m-online.net [192.168.6.70]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bgV2UGLqLL7o; Tue, 1 May 2018 01:30:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Info: SKGgLSfu14m/5oEwi2JvnQqFJTwzk5aJGb/Ku2XXl2s= Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [195.140.253.167]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Tue, 1 May 2018 01:30:32 +0200 (CEST) To: Otavio Salvador , Tom Rini References: <53904a8f-7ba2-7f09-4e93-a95a780f60c7@denx.de> <8cc34667-5bb3-9642-40e2-d56b28f56646@prevas.dk> <32a348ed6176434db8178d29d7e1f183@SOC-EX01V.e01.socionext.com> <5ca366ed-3108-4a56-caaf-06b4f136d259@denx.de> <627e0fde-f97f-5c49-bc1a-325e7baa9072@linux.intel.com> <0802e876-fda0-d8d2-9dca-18ba8cbe073e@denx.de> <20180430202522.GK31362@bill-the-cat.ec.rr.com> From: Marek Vasut Message-ID: <91b044f5-b110-8a74-31cd-bbbd2176f57e@denx.de> Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 01:30:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Cc: Masahiro Yamada , Otavio Salvador , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] u-boot: Upgrade to 2018.03 release 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, 30 Apr 2018 23:30:35 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 04/30/2018 10:29 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:25 PM Tom Rini wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:57:18PM +0000, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:53 PM Alexander Kanavin < >>> alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 04/30/2018 08:25 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>>>>>>> Isn't it possible to solve your issue in the OE side? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can we NOT compile DTC alongside U-Boot somehow ? :) >>>>>>> That'd be the most desired solution IMO. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes please. Can you adjust the recipes and classes in oe-core, and >>>>>> remove the dtc recipe altogether? >>>>> >>>>> Remove dtc recipe ? Not sure I understand what you're implying. >>> >>>> If u-boot bundles dtc in its source tree, can we use that, and remove >>>> the external dtc recipe? >>> >>> We shouldn't. The point in use the recipes inside OE-Core is because our >>> bugfixes, patches and etc are used everywhere. If we use the bundled > copy >>> how we'd fix a host issue for example? Duplicate patches? > >> What do you do for the kernel here? > > We use our dtc-native. As we do for all other recipes (but few exceptions) Yeah, we should use the DTC from OE , not the DTC from U-Boot. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut