Re: [yocto] Contribute meta-installer to yocto

[Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com>]

On 2017年11月22日 23:40, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:58 AM, Alexander Kanavin
> <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On 11/22/2017 04:26 AM, Hongxu Jia wrote:
>>>> If it is OK, I will send pull request to OE for review, and
>>>> my opinion is to suggest to create meta-installer sub layer in OE.
>>>>
>>> To clarify, I mean to create sub dir meta-installer in
>>> git://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded
>>
>> Should the directory be called meta-anaconda then? There are many available
>> installers, and this would make it clear what the directory contains, I
>> think.
>>
>>
> I think meta-installers is more generic and probably good, you could
> create a top level
> repo called meta-installers and put this implementation underneath at
> meta-anaconda
> which leaves room to aggregate other installers under same roof. but
> again I dont
> have strong opinion either way.

The meta-openembedded/meta-installer/meta-anaconda,
there are too many meta-*, with a simple search in OE,
it seems breaking the traditional naming.

How about still name the top level 'meta-insatller', and
change the name of enable setting.

- For the target build, enable it by DISTRO_FEATURES_append = " 
anaconda-support"

- For the host build, enable it by DISTRO = 'anaconda'

Without above setting, the anaconda installer does not work even
though meta-installer included. Which other installer could put
here and work with their ways.

- Rename the existed README -> README.anaconda, and create a
   new one to introduce meta-installer as an installer framework.

- Rename the installation image core-image-installer to core-image-anaconda

One side effect is we have to keep LAYERDEPENDS_meta-installer
with a maximal set (which means for other installer, it may not require
these depends layers), but I think it is acceptable. Other meta-* layer
may have the same issue.

//Hongxu

>> Alex