Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-09 Thread Alex J Lennon
On 09/08/2014 12:22, Mike Looijmans wrote: > On 08/09/2014 10:44 AM, Alex J Lennon wrote: > > Going off-topic here I guess, but I think you can use the UBI block > layer in combination with e.g. squashfs. Never tried it, but it should > be possible to create an UBI volume, write a squash blob into

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-09 Thread Mike Looijmans
On 08/09/2014 10:44 AM, Alex J Lennon wrote: On 09/08/2014 09:13, Mike Looijmans wrote: On 08/07/2014 03:05 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: On Thursday 07 August 2014 11:13:02 Alex J Lennon wrote: Historically I, and I suspect others, have done full image updates of the storage medium, onboard flas

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-09 Thread Alex J Lennon
On 09/08/2014 09:13, Mike Looijmans wrote: > On 08/07/2014 03:05 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: >> On Thursday 07 August 2014 11:13:02 Alex J Lennon wrote: >>> Historically I, and I suspect others, have done full image updates of >>> the storage medium, onboard flash or whatever but these images are >>

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-09 Thread Mike Looijmans
On 08/07/2014 03:05 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: On Thursday 07 August 2014 11:13:02 Alex J Lennon wrote: Historically I, and I suspect others, have done full image updates of the storage medium, onboard flash or whatever but these images are getting so big now that I am trying to move away from t

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-08 Thread Alex J Lennon
Hi Paul, > Personally with how fragile package management can end up being, I'm > convinced > that full-image updates are the way to go for a lot of cases, but ideally > with > some intelligence so that you only ship the changes (at a filesystem level > rather than a package or file level). Th

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-08 Thread Nicolas Dechesne
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Personally with how fragile package management can end up being, I'm convinced > that full-image updates are the way to go for a lot of cases, but ideally with > some intelligence so that you only ship the changes (at a filesystem level > rath

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-07 Thread Alex J Lennon
On 07/08/2014 14:05, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi Alex, > > On Thursday 07 August 2014 11:13:02 Alex J Lennon wrote: >> On 07/08/2014 10:10, Paul Eggleton wrote: >> fwiw Upgrade solutions are something that is still a read need imho, as >> I think we discussed at one of the FOSDEMs. >> >> (The other

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-07 Thread Paul Eggleton
Hi Alex, On Thursday 07 August 2014 11:13:02 Alex J Lennon wrote: > On 07/08/2014 10:10, Paul Eggleton wrote: > fwiw Upgrade solutions are something that is still a read need imho, as > I think we discussed at one of the FOSDEMs. > > (The other real need being an on-board test framework, again im

Re: [OE-core] [yocto] RFC: Improving the developer workflow

2014-08-07 Thread Alex J Lennon
On 07/08/2014 10:10, Paul Eggleton wrote: > Hi folks, > > As most of you know within the Yocto Project and OpenEmbedded we've been > trying to figure out how to improve the OE developer workflow. This > potentially > covers a lot of different areas, but one in particular I where think we can >