On 2010-10-28 9:34 PM, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > Hi. > > We (OpenInkpot project [1]) are currently investigating the possibility > to drop our own homebrew embedded distribuion [2] and switch to use > OpenWRT + OpenInkpot-specific overlay. We've got some questions: > > 1) Is it possible to add new targets/subtargets to overlay without > forking OpenWRT repository? We've got several specialized eBook > devices which are quite useless without our set of packages. They cannot currently be imported through the package feed system. However adding a target does not require modifying existing files. If you add a new target directory to the right location, the build system will find and use it.
> 1a) If it is not possible, could such targets/subtargets be added > directly to OpenWRT? Sure, we'd prefer having actively maintained targets in our SVN instead of elsewhere. > 2) Is it possible to use git to develop kernel for subset of targets in > OpenWRT? We still have a lot of changes sitting in our kernel tree > and don't want to start using patch files again. > 2a) If it is not feasible, then is it possible to disable > kernel-related functionality and roll out our own in our feed? It's possible to use an external tree, but we'd recommend using the generic OpenWrt patches as base, as they simplify some aspects of porting. The main reason why we're using patches instead of git trees is that reviewing (and forward porting) properly maintained patches is typically a lot easier than going through a git repository with a longer history. I've seen several projects move from a maintained patch series to maintaining changes in git, because the developers considered it more convenient. The result of such development model changes were that these projects made their kernel trees completely useless for many downstream projects (including us) that were previously relying on integrating the maintained patches with other changes. > 3) Is it hard to enable locales in toolchains (both uClibc-based and > eglibc-based)? I don't think so, but I haven't looked into the details of what's required for locale support wrt. cross-compiling yet. > All the questions above assume we don't want to fork OpenWRT, we want to > work together and push as much functionality as possible back. Sounds good. - Felix _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
