On 07/12/2016 06:06 PM, Saul Wold wrote: > On Tue, 2016-07-12 at 10:59 -0700, Jianxun Zhang wrote: >> This patch seriese introduces new RMC project and RMC distro that's >> developped based on RMC. >> >> The test is done on several boards, including boards checked in >> examples. (poky:6bb3069; meta-intel: 9bb4622) >> >> Some people may have checked implementation before, but I have done >> a lot refactoring since this week. Now RMC project and RMC distro >> are splitted and bbclasses are provided for reuse in other clients. >> These should be the biggest change you didn't see in old code. >> >> The last patch in the series adds examples and a new document >> README.rmc.distro in meta-intel. I think it could make original >> README too lengthy if we put everyting in README, but let me know >> if a single readme is still preferred. >> > I strongly urge you not to use the word "distro" here or in the recipe > name. > >> README.rmc.distro is designed to be the interfce to new users (and >> myself). Information of RMC project can be obtained from rmc >> recipes, bbclass and RMC project's README. I should have left traces >> to these information in code. >> >> Known issues: >> RMC tool crashes on a NUC gen 4 but doesn't on another sample. Other >> boards work as expected (nuc gen 6, minnowmax, T100,). >> >> Default "install" boot option could be seen although RMC distro >> always has its own installer effective. This could confuse users when >> both of install and "RMC install" options show up on the board. >> >> >> Jianxun Zhang (6): >> rmc: Add Runtime Machine Configuration (RMC) project >> gnu-efi: Add GUID for SMBIOS 3 entry point structure >> systemd-boot: load board-specific entry and kernel cmdline >> EFI installer: deploy board-specific data and kernel cmdline >> rmc: add recipe and bbclass for feature "rmc distro" >> rmc: document and examples for rmc distro feature >> >> README.rmc.distro | 261 >> +++++++++++++++++ > Let's not have the README.rmc.distro in the top level, maybe we need to > have a documentation directory and we can move this file there. >
That would make sense, if it looks like we're going to have more stand-alone documentation - do you foresee that? I guess I don't have a problem with a separate README like this because meta-intel is supposedly just a temporary stopover for this since it's ultimately destined for oe-core. Where would this go in oe-core? Tom -- _______________________________________________ meta-intel mailing list meta-intel@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
