On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 16:38 +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > 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.
"fulllinux"? "linuxcmdline"? Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core