Also, it seems to be a bit less lightweight than what we have in oe-core. I would not like to pull unnecessary recipes in. Is it possible to work the oe-core stuff around?
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> wrote: > I believe the developer story would be simpler with oe-core as opposed to > meta-sourcery. Besides, some documentation would be nice to have how to use > it, how it will work alongside the oe-core "example", and so forth. > > You know, something similar to what the Linaro people seem to have. > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Chris Larson <clar...@kergoth.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Brian Hutchinson >> <b.hutch...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> wrote: >>> >>>> is this officially supported by the Yocto project? I would not like to >>>> use Yocto for my own purposes if it is something unsupported, and I would >>>> need to put a significant investment into to it to make the releases >>>> buildable, et cetera. >>>> >>> >> I'm not certain as to the official Yocto support stance on >> external-sourcery as it exists in or-core at this time, but if you do want >> to use the Sourcery G++ toolchain rather than one of the alternatives >> suggested by others in this thread, you can use the meta-sourcery layer, >> which while it isn't officially supported by Yocto, is officially supported >> by Mentor Graphics, the company which provides the aforementioned toolchain. >> -- >> Christopher Larson >> clarson at kergoth dot com >> Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus >> Maintainer - Tslib >> Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics >> > >
_______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
