On 04/03/2012 02:58 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said: > On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 11:18 -0700, John Stultz wrote: >> On 04/02/2012 10:29 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote: >>> On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 08:37 -0700, John Stultz wrote: >>>> On 03/31/2012 02:17 AM, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote: >>>>> We almost certainly need board specific android and ubuntu fragments as >>>>> well, so I'll add vexpress-android.conf and vexpress-ubuntu.conf as >>>>> well. (Unless there is some magic to have conditional config options in >>>>> a fragment?) >>>> >>>> No, the config fragments are pretty simple, so there's no conditional >>>> logic in them. Your idea for a board-type.conf style split sounds like a >>>> fair idea. Although, I'm curious what would be an example of this? >>> >>> There's often let's-just-get-it-working hacks produced, and sometimes >>> you don't want to risk breaking other boards by putting things into a >>> common config. >>> >>> My example of this is >>> http://android.git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=kernel/vexpress-a9.git;a=commit;h=20a2abd40fff4d5942263c09b9852986c47aaa32 >>> >>> Of course, this could be an argument for not enabling such things. ;-) >> >> Ok. Interesting. I can see how this sort of flexibility is useful. So >> I'm fine if folks want to add board-distro specific tweaks. Trying to >> find some more unified way of building might be necessary, so folks >> aren't having to customize things too drastically. Your directory method >> seems like would solve this, but I need to spend some more time >> understanding Andy's suggestion and understanding how it works with >> Andrey's centralized tree. > > Possibly if we just had a symlink > > configs/omap_5430evm/base/main.conf --> > arch/arm/configs/omap_5430evm_defconfig > > but then that defconfig has some non board specific stuff, like EXT > file-systems configured. And Andrey's Android branch would have TI's > Android topics, so that 'base' defconfig file would also gain TI's > Android flavourings. (Neither of these issues might be a problem in > practice.)
It's really preferable to keep to one defconfig for everything but sometimes that won't be possible (you were saying you might need more than one for presumably very basic reasons). In that case the config deltas will need to be applied to n defconfigs as part of the rebase / merge process creating the output tree. So it might be simpler instead of using multiple symlinks if the LT base tree creates and maintains a text file that is a list of "defconfigs this tree maintains" which will all get processed by the topic management scripts in turn for each config delta when the flavourings are added. -Andy -- Andy Green | TI Landing Team Leader Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs | Follow Linaro http://facebook.com/pages/Linaro/155974581091106 - http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://linaro.org/linaro-blog _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
