Re: [PATCH] base.bbclass: add support for SOC_FAMILY in COMPATIBLE_MACHINES

[Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>]

On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 09:11:19AM -0500, Maupin, Chase wrote:
> 
> > Failing that though, testing COMPATIBLE_MACHINE against MACHINE_CLASS
> > probably is more desirable than adding a completely new variable (i.e.
> > SOC_FAMILY) for that purpose.
> 
> From what I've learned it seems that MACHINE_CLASS and SOC_FAMILY are 
> different in what they are trying to accomplish.
> 
> SOC_FAMILY is defining a family of processors and the features that 
> processor has.  Whereas MACHINE_CLASS is defining a type of device and its 
> features which can use different processors.  So basically SOC_FAMILY 
> defines common processors and MACHINE_CLASS defines common end devices.
> 
> This difference is why SOC_FAMILY exists.  We can have many processors that 
> fit into an SOC_FAMILY that can be used across a variety of end applications 
> from DVR to ip net camera to mobile phone.

I guess this conclusion was direved solely from the names of the respective 
variables. As technically both of them are exactly the same - a variable set 
in machine config or include file and used in OVERRIDES...

-- 
Denys