On 03/30/2012 10:07 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 09:33 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/30/2012 01:19 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
To do that the vexpress config fragment will need to be a topic branch
on the ARM Landing Teams git, and every topic which changes a config
needs to be stacked on top of that. Is that what is expected?
I'm not sure I'm following you here. I'm hoping to have the base
configs added to the lianro-android tree, then as each topic gets
merged, the topics which require an option, enable them in the fragments
as well.
I'm not sure I follow you either :-)
Our topic branches are based on mainline Linux. If those topics require
config changes, do you suggest they add a separate config fragment? Or
patch an existing one? If the latter, where does this fragment come
from? It will have to exist into our tree and our topics based on top of
it. I was saying that in the case of the vexpress fragment, this would
live in our tree as it's own topic branch and be pulled into
linux-linaro. Which seems to make sense, as our tree exists to provide
enablement for vexpress.
Right right right. I forgot with the new topic branch method, everything
based on mainline and not a tree Andrey maintains, so you don't have a
reference to the config tree.
In that case, just go ahead and push the full config to the config tree.
If we need to do have fullly-enabled vs upstream builds we can deal with
the warnings in the latter case (or maybe further split the board
configs into -upstream and -lt ?).
The only hard part is that I have to somewhat blindly trust the configs
being sent to me, as the tree I'm building/testing with doesn't
necessarily have all of the features requested. But I'll try to get the
build folks to keep me in the loop on what warnings they see.
thanks
-john
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
