Re: Piglit in Poky

[Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Paul Eggleton schreef op 28-12-13 12:48:
> Hi Koen,
> 
> On Tuesday 24 December 2013 15:22:32 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Burton, Ross schreef op 23-12-13 19:01:
>>> We'd like to integrate Piglit (an OpenGL test suite) into Poky so
>>> that we can run automated QA on the GL stack.  Piglit is currently
>>> residing in meta-oe, but as Poky is a self-contained project we can't
>>> just add meta-oe to it:  apart from the size of meta-oe, we can't
>>> ensure stability if meta-oe makes incompatible changes that affect
>>> Poky.
>>> 
>>> Piglit isn't a stand-alone package, there are the dependencies of
>>> waffle, python-mako and python-numpy to consider too.  There are two 
>>> possibilities I can see:
>>> 
>>> 1) Move piglit and deps to oe-core.  Piglit is for QA purposes only
>>> and pushes the boundaries of "core platform".  In a sense this is a
>>> repeat of the discussion we had with Midori...  does oe-core contain
>>> everything needed to sufficiently exercise the core components it
>>> ships or not?
>>> 
>>> 2) Add piglit and deps to meta-yocto.  Probably a new layer called 
>>> meta-yocto-qa (or similar) because the Yocto Compatible guidelines
>>> forbid mixing distribution policy and recipes.
>> 
>> Speaking of layers, can you *please* rename meta-yocto to meta-poky?
>> It's what it's actually is and would remove a lot of confusion when
>> trying to explain that yocto is not a distro, even if the distro layer
>> is called 'meta-yocto'.
> 
> This is a tangent, but a couple of points:
> 
> 1) This rename would not come for free. We'd need to update people's
> existing bblayers.conf files on the fly, as we did when meta-yocto-bsp
> was split out of meta-yocto, and thus bump LCONF_VERSION; however, doing
> this only in poky has resulted in annoying problems when users remove
> poky from their configurations (since LCONF_VERSION is out-of-step
> between Poky and OE-Core, leading to confusing errors in this situation).
> Thus I think we'd want to solve this once and for all by bumping the
> value in OE-Core as well as Poky.
> 
> 2) If you propose this rename, perhaps you will also consider renaming 
> meta-oe, since that name within a similarly named meta-openembedded
> repository leads to a similar level of confusion...?

I have no problems with renaming that layer since I get confused by this a
few times a week myself :)

regards,

Koen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iD8DBQFSvu4jMkyGM64RGpERAqnnAJ9+ASZITy/zGdjAC9PypPkWVsKO/ACdFF00
0Mfkmf+s20DWkHs6NwxkZYM=
=YCAe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----