Re: [yocto] [PATCH 3/3] poky-tiny: avoid eglibc locale packaging

2012-03-31 Thread Kamble, Nitin A
> -Original Message- > From: Darren Hart [mailto:dvh...@linux.intel.com] > > Thanks for looking into this Nitin! I'm fine with this fix if it gets > things going. I wonder though, I presume omitting something from > DISTRO_FEATURES_LIBC is what triggers this bug... could that same > omis

Re: [yocto] [PATCH 0/3][linux-yocto-3.2][meta] tiny: Refactor tiny ktype config

2012-03-31 Thread Bruce Ashfield
On 12-03-31 10:44 AM, Darren Hart wrote: Prepare for the linux-yocto-tiny_3.2 recipe by consolidating the tiny config and factoring out what should be common functinionality. Once included, I'll send the linux-yocto-tiny_3.2 patch against oe-core with the proper SRCREV_meta. The other linux-yoct

Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner

2012-03-31 Thread Chris Larson
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > I think the repository format used for poky in yocto project > could also be confusing things. Since it does not clone openembedded-core > or bitbake from upstream locations but maintains a copy of its own. even > though they are ditto copies of u

Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner

2012-03-31 Thread Khem Raj
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 15:18 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: >> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: >> > >> > Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven: >> > >> >> On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >

Re: [yocto] [PATCH 2/3] cross-canadian.bbclass: fix rpath for sdk executables

2012-03-31 Thread Khem Raj
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:57 AM, Martin Jansa wrote: > Maybe someone should write vim-syntax file for .bb and .bbclass :). http://git.openembedded.org/bitbake/tree/contrib/vim ___ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org

Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner

2012-03-31 Thread Paul Eggleton
On Friday 30 March 2012 11:44:23 Koen Kooi wrote: > The Angstrom core team would like to move angstrom under the yocto banner so > we can formally claim to be 'yocto'. I think a lot of points have been well addressed in this thread already, but I wanted to add (and reiterate) a few things. None o

[yocto] [PATCH 3/3] meta: Add common-pc-tiny.scc

2012-03-31 Thread Darren Hart
Create the MACHINE-KTYPE description file for common-pc and tiny. This is used by the qemux86 machine for the linux-yocto-tiny kernel recipe. Add the common-pc hardware config, but not all the features included by the common-pc-standard.scc file. Signed-off-by: Darren Hart --- .../kernel-cache/b

[yocto] [PATCH 2/3] tiny: Minimize the tiny config

2012-03-31 Thread Darren Hart
From: Darren Hart The config fragments in the tiny ktype were simply pulled in from a collection of experimental fragments. Boil things down to a core policy (yocto.cfg) and tiny-specific configs (tiny.cfg). Signed-off-by: Darren Hart --- .../tiny/serial.cfg => cfg/serial-8250.cfg}|

[yocto] [PATCH 1/3] meta: common-pc add dependencies to cfg

2012-03-31 Thread Darren Hart
When building with the allnoconfig option, some of the common-pc CONFIG options are dropped due to missing dependencies. This machine also depended on certain default options, such as CONFIG_E1000, which are not enabled with allnoconfig. Add the dependencies and CONFIG_E1000 explicitly. Signed-of

[yocto] [PATCH 0/3][linux-yocto-3.2][meta] tiny: Refactor tiny ktype config

2012-03-31 Thread Darren Hart
Prepare for the linux-yocto-tiny_3.2 recipe by consolidating the tiny config and factoring out what should be common functinionality. Once included, I'll send the linux-yocto-tiny_3.2 patch against oe-core with the proper SRCREV_meta. The other linux-yocto recipes don't need an updated meta SRCREV

Re: [yocto] Suspicious warnings while beta testing yocto 1.2

2012-03-31 Thread Andrea Galbusera
Bruce, On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On 12-03-30 01:18 PM, Andrea Galbusera wrote: >> >> While beta testing yocto 1.2 I'm building for beagleboard with: >> >> OE Build Configuration: >> BB_VERSION        = "1.15.1" >> TARGET_ARCH       = "arm" >> TARGET_OS         = "li

Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner

2012-03-31 Thread Frans Meulenbroeks
Reading the discussion, I was wondering whether something under the yocto umbrella should be self-contained layerwise. E.g. would it be ok to depend on an external meta-whatsoever? If so, this does have some quality implications, especially if the external repo has higher prio and contains alterna

Re: [yocto] [PATCH 2/3] cross-canadian.bbclass: fix rpath for sdk executables

2012-03-31 Thread Martin Jansa
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 03:52:05PM -0700, nitin.a.kam...@intel.com wrote: > From: Nitin A Kamble > > This makes the libraries located in places like this findable: > /usr/local/oecore-x86_64/sysroots/x86_64-oesdk-linux/usr/lib > > Which avoids linking cross canadian sdk executables with host lib

Re: [yocto] Moving angstrom under the yocto banner

2012-03-31 Thread Richard Purdie
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 20:00 -0700, Chris Larson wrote: > Not to be terribly pendatic or difficult here, but technically, the > comparison you make here doesn't ring true. bitbake in poky *still* > has changes that never went into the upstream repository. I was surprised to hear that but its easy e