On 08/20/2012 09:50 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
Adding David back...
-M
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Matthew McClintock <m...@freescale.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
I just checked and we do have a few obscure bits in our kernel tree's
header files. Nothing that 99.9% would use but it seems reasonable to
include these...
Do you want applications for sdk host to be built using these obscure bits ?
if yes I would like to know why?
since then you are creating a scenariou where nativesdk is dependent on target
kernel and we need to fix it so that nativesdk can be common again.
if patches you are carrying are good for nativesdk headers can they be made
available for other kernels like linux-yocto e.g. ?
right now if we do this we are pretty much saying fsl machine layer can really
not mix with other BSPs. Many people use yocto commonly on more than one kind
of CPU and this does not scale.
Hmm I think I was just confused. We don't need any modifications for
the headers for nativesdk foo (that is the x86 tools in
meta-toolchain).
So, I think everything is OK as is.. if you look at meta-toolchain you
will see it includes our kernel's headers for cross compiling.
-M
Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding
I was under the impression that linux-libc-headers-nativesdk was
installed under
/opt/poky/1.2/sysroots/<target-sysroot>/..., which it obviously is not.
Br,
David
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
