On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 08:37 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > from section 1.1 of BSP developers guide: > > http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/latest/bsp-guide/bsp-guide.html#bsp-layers > > first, it's not actually *required* that a layer name start with the > prefix "meta-", is it? pretty sure it's not and, if it isn't, that > should be made abundantly clear. it's fine to point out that it's a > well-established convention but it should still be mentioned > explicitly that it's not necessary. >
Right, the naming isn't required and it would make sense to make that clear, I agree. > second, the BBLAYERS example there seems overly complicated and > potentially confusing to beginners. the fact that meta-yocto is listed > as NON_REMOVABLE might make readers wonder how they're supposed to > know that. why not go with something a lot more people will see, like, > say: > > BBLAYERS = ?" \ <-- and that looks like a typo > /usr/local/src/yocto/meta \ > /usr/local/src/yocto/meta-ti \ > " > > BBLAYERS_NON_REMOVABLE ?= " \ > /usr/local/src/yocto/meta \ > " > I agree - the whole NON_REMOVABLE thing doesn't add anything and should be removed - the example is just trying to show how to add a BSP layer - the rest just adds potential confusion. And, yeah, it's a typo.. > finally, the passing reference to layers that contain sub-BSP-layers > is good, but show an example, such as the fact that the meta-crownbay > layer.conf file has a dependency on meta-intel: > > ... > LAYERDEPENDS_crownbay = "intel" > > never pass up the opportunity to reinforce an idea with a few lines > of actual code. :-) > Agreed, but on the other hand we don't really want to be too intel-specific (I know, we have crownbay everywhere else, but anyway..) Tom > more shortly ... > > rday > _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto