Re: [yocto] meta-baryon flexibility

2012-07-18 Thread Joshua Lock
On 18/07/12 04:40, James Abernathy wrote: On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Joshua Lock mailto:j...@linux.intel.com>> wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 15:24 -0400, Jim Abernathy wrote: > In an effort to explore how independent a layer could be to the > underlying hardware, I took the m

Re: [yocto] meta-baryon flexibility

2012-07-18 Thread James Abernathy
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Joshua Lock wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 15:24 -0400, Jim Abernathy wrote: > > In an effort to explore how independent a layer could be to the > > underlying hardware, I took the meta-baryon NAS layer and got it built > > from master using the n450 BSP. With

Re: [yocto] meta-baryon flexibility

2012-07-17 Thread Joshua Lock
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 15:24 -0400, Jim Abernathy wrote: > In an effort to explore how independent a layer could be to the > underlying hardware, I took the meta-baryon NAS layer and got it built > from master using the n450 BSP. With that working I decided to replace > the n450 with sugarbay.

[yocto] meta-baryon flexibility

2012-07-17 Thread Jim Abernathy
In an effort to explore how independent a layer could be to the underlying hardware, I took the meta-baryon NAS layer and got it built from master using the n450 BSP. With that working I decided to replace the n450 with sugarbay. While the n450 can support X11 and sato, it was not generated b