On Fri, 6 Mar 2015, Jens Lucius wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am working on a custom machine layer, which until now has it´s own u-boot
> recipe for a custom u-boot.
>
> I want to add a recipe for mainline u-boot additional to that. I have defined
> a PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot and PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader which
> point to the custom u-boot to not break the current build, which can be
> changed to the mainline u-boot if needed to build the mainline.
>
> First question: Do I need to define both PREFERRED_PROVIDER (u-boot and
> virtual/bootloader)? I have seen different approaches in different layers.
i would *think* you could do the following if you wanted to do it in
two stages for flexibility:
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "u-boot"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot = "u-boot-my-custom-recipe"
the other option i see being used in the meta-ti layer (which is
probably what you're talking about) sets both to the same TI-specific
value:
ti33x.inc:PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader = "u-boot-ti-staging"
ti33x.inc:PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot = "u-boot-ti-staging"
i see freescale does the same thing:
# Freescale BSP default providers
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/xserver = "xserver-xorg"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel ??= "linux-imx"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_u-boot ??= "u-boot-fslc"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader ??= "u-boot-fslc"
i see this as well, which seems like overkill:
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/bootloader_ls102xa ?= "u-boot-ls1"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel_ls102xa ?= "linux-ls1"
are there any style recommendations for this?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
