[oe] [meta-handheld][PATCH 2/2] recipes-kernel: use shared linux.inc from meta-oe

[Martin Jansa]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:40:05AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 03:45:19PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:52:15AM +0200, Andrea Adami wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > * notice that ARM_KEEP_OABI default value is now 0 instead of 1
> > > >  but only linux-hackndev and linux-handhelds-2.6-2.6.21 had
> > > >  CONFIG_OABI_COMPAT=y in defconfigs so this shouldn't change anything
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa at gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > Martin,
> > > 
> > > I have some concerns here, because I don't think meta-handeld should
> > > depend on meta-oe.
> > > (I know udev .bbappend requires it now but talking with Paul we found
> > > a better solution and udev will disappear from layer soon).
> > 
> > Denis wanted linux.inc also in some smaller layer then meta-oe, so maybe
> > we can create meta-bsp-support in meta-opememebedded repository and move
> > it there?
> > 
> > Having linux.inc copy for each BSP is wrong.
> 
> Remind me, what was the reason to have linux.inc as a separate file in the 
> first place? I mean, can we roll it back to kernel.bbclass in OE-Core? If not, 

I guess that linux-yocto would not like linux.inc functionality in
kernel.bbclass, but I haven't looked into linux-yocto much, but I guess
it's still using kernel.bbclass..

> maybe it would be easier to push it as is to OE-Core, since it's much cleaner 
> now?

yes if someone wants to push it there, feel free

Cheers,
-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/attachments/20120329/7fa5b9b1/attachment-0002.sig>