So I was digging in the meta-xilinx layer and down in recipes-kernel/linux/linux-zynqmp-mainline_3.19.bb there are two KMACHINE lines:
KMACHINE_ep108-zynqmp ?= "zynqmp" KMACHINE_qemuzynqmp ?= "zynqmp" Given these two lines, this is a good example that shows two machines mapping to the same KMACHINE value? Scott >-----Original Message----- >From: Robert P. J. Day [mailto:rpj...@crashcourse.ca] >Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 9:15 AM >To: Rifenbark, Scott M >Cc: Nathan Rossi; Yocto discussion list >Subject: RE: [yocto] in kernel manual, should pick another example for >KMACHINE > >On Thu, 5 Mar 2015, Rifenbark, Scott M wrote: > >> I like Nathan's suggestion for the text. Can someone explain to me >> though why emenlow is not a good example here? In the >> linux-yocto_3.14.bbappend file, KMACHINE_emenlow-noemgd is set equal >> to "emenlow". Isn't this equating emenlow-noemgd and emenlow? I am >> probably mis-understanding it so I could use some further explanation. > > normally, yes, but there *is* only the emenlow-noemgd machine, there is >no longer an emenlow machine. AIUI, there *used* to be both machines, >both using the same KMACHINE value, and that would have been a perfect >example. > > personally, i think it would be more informative if you had two or more > actual >machines mapping to the same KMACHINE value, but that's just me. > >rday > >-- > >=========================================================== >============= >Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA > http://crashcourse.ca > >Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday >LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday >=========================================================== >============= -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto