[OE-core] [PATCH 5/3] conf/machine/include: Start to fill out architecture specific tune include files and tune features

[Mark Hatle]

On 7/25/11 2:34 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On 07/25/2011 11:55 AM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> On 7/22/11 1:14 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On 07/22/2011 11:00 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>> These changes revolve around the idea of tune features. These are represented by
>>>> 'flag' strings that are included in the TUNE_FEATURES variable.
>>>>
>>>> Any string included in TUNE_FEATURES should also add a TUNEVALID[<name>] entry so
>>>> we can know which flags are available in TUNE_FEATURES and have documentation about
>>>> what the flags do. We will add sanity code to error if flags are listed in
>>>> TUNE_FEATURES but are not documented in TUNEVALID.
>>>>
>>>> A given tune configuration will want to define one or more predetermined sets of
>>>> _FEATURE flag lists. These are defined in the form TUNE_FEATURES_tune-<name>.
>>>> For defined tune configuation, <name> should be added to the AVAILTUNE list so that
>>>> we can determine what tune configurations are available. Flags cannot be used in this
>>>> case as with TUNEVALID since its useful to be able to build up tune lists from other
>>>> TUNE_FEATURES_tune-yyy options.
>>>>
>>>> A given tune configuration may also define PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS_tune-<name> and
>>>> BASE_LIB_tune-<name> to control the multilib location. All options can be overridden
>>>> by the distro or local user configuration.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org>
>>>
>>> As a specific nit, we can't use x86_64 in OVERRIDES (using the normal
>>> mechanism need base_contains(...).  Can we switch to calling it amd64
>>> ala Debian/Ubuntu?  Aside from that, as I told Mark the other day, this
>>> looks good to me.
>>>
>>
>> I actually prefer "x86-64" I think that is a reasonable compromise between the
>> x86_64 naming and the need to not use "_".
> 
> That causes other problems, no?  Top of my head would be that deb/ipk
> doesn't allow a dash in that field.  Could be mistaken tho...
> 

I expect the packaging system to have to have change the fields to suite their
specific needs.  I know I have search/replace items similar to that in RPM
because there are constructs that RPM doesn't support that deb and ipk do.

--Mark