From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PhqQX-0005Lf-TC for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:27:53 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p0PLR56f009440 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:27:05 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09139-05 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:27:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p0PLQxc7009434 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:27:00 GMT From: Richard Purdie To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: References: <4D36F9BE.1010601@xora.org.uk> <4D3DAB2A.3070303@balister.org> <4D3F0E15.7050904@mentor.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:26:43 +0000 Message-ID: <1295990803.27814.36.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: openembedded-core git repository X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:27:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 11:19 -0700, Chris Larson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > >>> * start an integration branch > >>> o remove bitbake > >> > >> Not sure what you mean with that. Which BB do you propose to use? > > > > Chris Larson has been doing a lot of work (and Richard has been confirming, > > testing, etc, etc) to try and keep poky's bitbake changes in sync with > > master when at all possible (the delta has gotten very very small, iirc). > > I would personally like to see yocto use upstream bitbake with git > submodules or similar, rather than maintaining its own bitbake > directory. I'd also like to see the bitbake sync completed, but it > seems like it's a low priority for Richard at this time. As you say, > though, the delta is fairly small, considering. I don't consider it a low priority and fully agree it needs to be fixed, there needs to be no delta. I doubt I'd go for submodules but making it match 1:1 commits with upstream bitbake is the intent and to script it. The Yocto development window is closing which has influenced my priority list. I'm also very conscious that we want to sort out a number of the fetcher problems and we're not there with that yet so I'm having to make some difficult choices over what I work on and in what order. On the plus side two features have just landed in Poky/Yocto: * Improved toolchain bootstrap process (no file overwriting) * A sysroot per machine which are both things we've wanted in OE for years and help in various ways (e.g. making sstate/pstage easier and reliable). We also merged libtool 2.4 and found a security hole that OE hadn't spotted. Those problems have been reported to libtool upstream. Cheers, Richard