Dear Koen,
Am Freitag, den 15.07.2011, 18:21 +0200 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> What do you think of making the oe-core branch[1] the default in the
> setup scripts? The basic needs are there and I'm using it for for all
> the new work I'm doing. It is missing a lot of recipes, but if people
> can name the ones that are missing we can port them over to meta-oe
> and/or meta-angstrom.
unfortunately I have not had time yet to try it out. I am still having
some concerns I raised in reply to Khem’s message [2] but I am pasting
them here again.
1. Compared to former oe.dev activity looking at meta-oe there are only
a handful of people doing contributions and a lot of recipes are
missing. I have the feeling that a lot of developers where left out in
the process of creating the new infrastructure and I do not know if they
just develop their private branches based on oe.dev or if they use
meta-oe and I have not noticed this.
2. Looking at the weekly changelogs sent to the lists I see a lot of
duplicated commits in each layer. Why is that needed? Is not that a
design problem of the layers?
3. I find the `recipe-*section*/` directories difficult to handle to
finding a recipe. Before I would use `recipe/` and then tab completion
and now I have to search for it. Are others uncomfortable with this?
4. What images are available in/for oe-core/meta-openembedded? I liked
for example `minimal{,-uclibc}`? `find . -name minimal*` in `oe-core` or
`meta-oe` did not give any result. Not to mention the images for
BeagleBoard or `micro-image` for the recently sent patches for payload
creation for coreboot.
Thanks,
Paul
> [1]
> http://git.angstrom-distribution.org/cgi-bin/cgit.cgi/setup-scripts/log/?h=oe-core
[2]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2011-July/033963.html
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Angstrom-distro-devel mailing list Angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/angstrom-distro-devel
