On 2014-03-01 19:10, Otavio Salvador wrote:
Hello David,
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:59 PM, David Nyström <david.c.nyst...@gmail.com>wrote:
On 2014-02-27 16:18, Laurentiu Palcu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 03:35:50PM +0100, David Nyström wrote:
On 2014-02-27 15:24, Laurentiu Palcu wrote:
Hi David,
My comments/questions below.
Thank you for your detailed comments on the RFC.
I will return with V2, where your comments are addressed when the
general approach is Acked.
What do you think about the general approach ?
I think the approach is ok. I don't know a simpler way than this to add
package feeds into the image.
OK, there seems to be no screaming objections from other parties either.
I'll resend v2
I understand why you are adding this here but I think it'd be good to the
settings to be put in a package so in a product we may add extra
repositories updating the package.
Good point.
I am trying to think now how this could be done (or optionally done).
What you think?
Yes, how would we determine the repo subdirs for a specific machine
without too much
anonymous python magic in a recipe, considering multilib setups?
Example for qemux86-64:
--
all
x86_64 = ${TARGET_ARCH}
core2-64 = ${??}
qemu86_64 = ${MACHINE}
--
If we can get a sane way to retrieve them, modifying the repo feeds via
install/postinstall should be the easy part.
Other point, PACKAGE_FEED_URIS could be change to PACKAGE_FEED_URI as it
matches SRC_URI for example.
Agreed.
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
