[oe] [PATCH 1/5] Use common files for AT91SAM9 configuration

[Ulf Samuelsson]

Frans Meulenbroeks skrev:
> 2010/10/22 Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson at atmel.com>:
>> Koen Kooi skrev:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 21-10-10 10:43, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>
>>>> PS: my opinion is that machine maintainers generally know better what
>>>> kernel works best for their machines than distro owners;
>>> And what's stopping them to put DEFAULT_PREFERENCE_machine and
>>> COMPATIBLE_MACHINE in the kernel recipes?
>>> There is no technical reason for setting it in machine.conf, so why
>>> should we break the orthogonality for that?
>>>
>>>> PPS: what's next? removing the PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/kernel from
>>>> the machine configs because you feel you know better ?
>>> That is actually an option these days since most kernel recipes set
>>> COMPATIBLE_MACHINE correctly :)
>>> But seriously, there are use cases for one distro to use a different
>>> kernel for a given machine for whatever reasons.
>>>
>>> This whole situation is a mess because recipes/linux is a mess. It would
>>> be a nice topic for OEDEM to see if we should switch to a poky BSP
>>> model. It would boils down to:
>>>
>>> 1 bblayer per machine or SOC_FAMILY containing:
>>> * machine.conf
>>> * first and second stage bootloaders
>>> * kernel
>> I have already come to the conclusion that we could have a single linux.bb
>> recipe.
>>
>> This assumes that you define things like KERNEL_VERSION, SOC_FAMILY
>> etc. outside the recipe and then include files with include filenames
>> containing approproate ENVIRONMENT variables.
>>
>> I.E:
>> include $(KERNEL_VERSION)/kernel_source
>> include $(SOC_FAMILY)/$(KERNEL_VERSION)/kernel_patch
>>
>> etc.
>>
> 
> Isn't that what kernel.bbclass is about ?
> 
> Wrt your example:
> instead of
> include $(KERNEL_VERSION)/kernel_source
> you could say:
> at the place where you define kernel_source:
> SRC_URI = "..."
> 
> Basically what you propose is kind of a template.
> 

Didn't study kernel.bbclass.

A problem with this approach, is that different kernel version
are located in different directories.

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/testing/linux-2.6.36-rc8.tar.gz
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.36.tar.bz2

If we want to have a single linux.bb file, then it
seems to be cleaner to have an include file per kernel version which 
specifies both the directory and the file name.

$(KERNEL_VERSION)/kernel_source would then contain

SRC_URI = 
"http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-$(KERNEL_VERSION).tar.bz2"

for a stable kernel, and


SRC_URI = 
"http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/testing/linux-$(KERNEL_VERSION).tar.bz2"
for a release candidate.

One this file is created for a kernel version, it would require little 
or no maintenance.

Similar files in the SOC_FAMILY directory structure would control which 
minor patch as well as other architecture specific patches to be added.


> Frans
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel