On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Justin Waters <[email protected]> wrote: > Daiane,
Hi Justin, Adding my comments on top of what Otavio already answered. > > We have been working with a vanilla (4.0+) kernel on some related platforms, > and are considering moving the BA16 platform to this as well. Is there an > effort to move some of the mainline work, such as etna-viv and related > packages, into the meta-freescale layer? I cannot say I have never heart about being asked if etna-viv would be supported by meta-fsl-arm, but I have not seen any concrete action about it. > Would it be acceptable to push a > 4.0 kernel even if those packages are not supported? I think it would be acceptable for sure. But obviously it would be better to work to get vivante support anyway even if using 4.0+ kernel. Dainae > > Thank you, > > Justin > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Daiane Angolini <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Justin Waters >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Daiane, >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Daiane Angolini >> > <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > +SRCBRANCH = "3.10.17-advantech" >> >> > +SRCREV = "852aa790665cd8f4350e5efbbb1d3471c78194fd" >> >> > +DEPENDS += "lzop-native bc-native" >> >> > +COMPATIBLE_MACHINE = "(mx6q-ba16)" >> >> >> >> Is there a plan to have more imx6 Advantech's boards in future? >> > >> > >> > Possibly, although most are based on this DMS-BA16 module, and only >> > really >> > differ with the device tree. More than likely, it will just be appended >> > lines to the device tree list. >> >> In this case, I think it's OK to get a machine name in >> COMPATIBLE_MACHINE. Otherwise I would point wandboard as an example on >> how to have several boards with only one kernel. >> >> Thanks >> >> Daiane > > > > > -- > Justin Waters > Director of Engineering > Timesys Corporation -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
