On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Matthew McClintock <m...@freescale.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Martin Jansa <martin.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: >> * also use weak assignment for SDK_NAME_PREFIX as suggested by khem >> * PACKAGE_ARCH is not 100% right too, because such SDK image usually has few >> machine specific packages included (e.g. base-files, securetty, opkg >> configs) >> but those are not important for SDK users so it's better to have one SDK for >> whole e.g. armv7a-vfp-neon then 6 SDK for each machine which would work the >> same. >> You can see diff between crespo and om-gta04 SDK here: >> http://build.shr-project.org/shr-core-staging/031/sdk/oecore-i686-armv7a-vfp-neon-toolchain-efl-crespo-om-gta04.diff >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <martin.ja...@gmail.com> >> --- >> meta/conf/bitbake.conf | 4 ++-- >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf >> index 87bb71c..91f8397 100644 >> --- a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf >> +++ b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf >> @@ -364,8 +364,8 @@ PKGDATA_DIR = "${TMPDIR}/pkgdata/${MULTIMACH_TARGET_SYS}" >> # SDK variables, >> ################################################################## >> >> -SDK_NAME_PREFIX = "oecore" >> -SDK_NAME = "${SDK_NAME_PREFIX}-${SDK_ARCH}-${TARGET_ARCH}" >> +SDK_NAME_PREFIX ?= "oecore" >> +SDK_NAME = "${SDK_NAME_PREFIX}-${SDK_ARCH}-${PACKAGE_ARCH}" > > Why PACKAGE_ARCH over TUNE_ARCH?
Or rather TUNE_PKGARCH? -M _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
