On Monday 30 December 2013 12:59:26 Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Monday 30 December 2013 09:35:18 Robert Yang wrote: > > I'm afraid that the standardlinux maybe a little confused with > > linuxstdbase, bu I don't have any better idea about it. > > You could be right. I've thought for a long time about renaming this and > haven't been able to come up with anything better. On the other hand, in our > current configuration we are actually using the basic/standardlinux > packagegroup as part of our LSB images; although that might not be the > right thing to continue doing - LSB probably ought to be independent. > > FWIW, let's consider this particular patch as RFC, maybe someone else has a > better idea of what to name it. I am very much convinced that "basic" is not > the right name though.
So, has anyone got any better ideas for the name of core-image-basic and packagegroup-core-basic? The idea is that these are meant to contain things that you might have on a more traditional or full-featured Linux system. Somehow "-traditionallinux" doesn't really work either. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core