On (04/09/12 16:25), William Mills wrote: > On 09/04/2012 01:18 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > > > > > >On 09/04/2012 05:20 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > >>On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Tomas Frydrych > >><tf+lists.yo...@r-finger.com> wrote: > >>>Hi Bruce, > >>> > >>>On 03/09/12 22:08, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > >>>>That being said, taking a step back, what are you trying to get out of > >>>>meta-yocto in this scenario ? > >>> > >>>a) I am targeting multiple chips, including TI Omap and Intel Atom. > >>>meta-yocto is a prerequisite for the various machines in meta-intel, so > >>>I have to include meta-yocto if I want to build images for an Intel > >>>chip. Nothing unusual here. > >>> > >>>b) meta-yocto is the Poky distro layer; if you want to use Poky, then > >>>you need meta-yocto. > >>> > >>>>see above. I misspoke. I don't think there's an intent to make meta-yocto > >>>>and meta-ti work together, but oe-core + meta-ti, that's the combo that > >>>>makes sense. > > oe-core + meta-ti should work or it needs to get fixed. > poky + meta-ti should work or it needs to get fixed. > > However I suspect the 2nd is not in the nightly builds yet. > > Denys is out for the next few days. He can comment more when he gets back. > > It has been our assumption that there is enough functionality in the > layer mechanisms that any of the "light weight" BSPs in yocto layer > could be completely overridden by a more complete layer (meta-ti in > this example). In addition the end system integrator should be able > to override definitions in any BSP layer. > > I suspect the current issue is just growing pains for a case that > has not been tested. Lets prove that false before taking more > drastic action. > > >>> > >>>The basic problem with meta-yocto is that it combines BSP stuff > >>>(meta-intel prerequisite, Atom& Beagle config) with distro stuff (Poky, > >>>Yocto branding). That's convenient for doing QA on a limited set of HW, > >>>but suboptimal for real use; BSP layers simply should not be dependent > >>>on distro layers, it largely defeats the purpose of having layers. > > Darren: Is it true you can't get @ the Intel BSP's w/o also getting > the poky distro defs? That does seem to mixing things a bit. (I am > not claiming meta-ti is clean yet but I want to understand the Intel > examples.) >
angstrom used meta-intel and it does not have meta-yocto that said I have not built for Intel machines using Angstrom so there might be issues but it parses fine for me so far. > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > yocto@yoctoproject.org > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- -Khem _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
