On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 16:33 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 3:34 PM Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sha...@linaro.org> > wrote: > > > > This is a backport request for dunfell, while picking up only the > > skeletal support for allowing mandatory dtschema handling for > > device trees built through the kernel, introduced from kernel > > version 5.16 onwards. > > The problem with adding this support to dunfell, is obvious in the > number of patches involved. We've also said/known that at some point > that we won't be able to support all new kernel versions with the LTS > release. This may be the start of drawing that line. > > Also, we've had to do some license tweaks in master just today for one > of the added packages (idna), so that would be needed as well. > > The validation isn't absolutely critical, I'd suggest that just the > wrappers and pkg-config fixes would be a smaller footprint to allow > the kernel to build, without the new package/feature additions to the > dunfell release. The new packages (and full validation) could still > possibly be done through a secondary or mixin layer. > > I'm not sure which way to go on this, but I thought I'd offer those > points for discussion.
I think this needs to be done in a mixin layer for dunfell. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#159062): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/159062 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/87439224/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
