On Wed, 2013-10-23 at 14:44 +0300, matti kaasinen wrote:
> 2013/10/23 Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com>
>
> > > Hi Ulf,
> > > Yes, linux.inc seems doing the job as you told - this clears a lot. I had
> > > been patching wrong file:${S}/defconfig instead of ${WORKDIR}/defconfig.
> > > It seems that I'm not alone with this mistake. ${S}/defconfig seems to be
> > > created by two patches:
> > > 0002-add-defconfig-file-to-use-as-.config.patch makes skeleton and
> > > 0073-defconfig-Update-bone-default-config.patch makes some modefications.
> > >
> >
>
> What I mean above is that beaglebone folks have made those patches for some
> reason that is not quite clear tome now considering how ${S}/defconfig is
> produced in linux.inc.
${S}/defconfig is neither used nor produced by OE.
>
> > ${WORKDIR}/defconfig (important one) is most likely coming from
> > > ...../linux/linux-mainline-3.8/beaglebone/defconfig as there is only one
> > > difference that could have come from configuration process.
> > >
> > > It seems that configuration fragments do not work in regular Angstrom - I
> > > suppose they are just Yocto stuff.
> >
> > yes.
> >
> > > Providing defconfig directly did not work - most likely it was written
> > over
> > > by the patching the seems creating the ${WORKDIR}/defconfig
> >
> > what do you mean ? defconfig is provided as any other file and then munged
> > over
> > in WORKDIR to make a .config
> >
> >
> This is outdated information - wild quess - before I noticed how that
> ${S}/defconfig was really generated by those patches I explained above.
As I said above, ${S}/defconfig is not used in the build.
_______________________________________________
Angstrom-distro-devel mailing list
Angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/angstrom-distro-devel
