From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R1ZEG-0003QA-PP for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 09:40:56 +0200 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Sep 2011 00:35:52 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,349,1312182000"; d="scan'208";a="49185753" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.120.53]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Sep 2011 00:35:51 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Saul Wold Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:35:50 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-10-generic-pae; KDE/4.6.2; i686; ; ) References: <201108261047.10782.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> <201109071418.10285.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> <4E683C38.20506@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4E683C38.20506@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201109080835.50416.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: Core image recipes X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 07:40:57 -0000 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thursday 08 September 2011 04:53:28 you wrote: > Now I understand what you are talking about, it might best to split this > into 2 tasks a task-core moved to recipes-core/tasks and a > task-core-x11, what about that? I think that's the only way this can really work, yes. > >> I can't access the LSB specs website right now > >> unfortunately but does this have an official name within LSB? It's not > >> "LSB-Core" is it? > > > > Yep, it's LSB-Core (yet another meaning of "core", sigh...) > > We could rename basic to task-lsb-core if that's what your thinking, but > as you point out yet another "core". Then again, if you're talking about LSB it makes sense to use the correct terminology. > >> If there's demand for a minimal image with package management (someone > >> asked for this on IRC just the other day, and it makes sense to me at > >> least) then that's what I'd suggest turning this into. In which case it > >> ought to be called core-image-minimal-pkgmgmt or something similar. > > > > Any opinions on this one? > > I think this is one that they can create themselves it's would be distro > specific and would require additional space allocated to the rootfs, > best for the distro do. Remember we are trying to provide foundations > and examples. core-image-minimal is supposed to be the smallest possible > image with login and shell. It can be used by someone to build on. That's exactly what I am thinking about. Since we already have such an image (core-image-base) that isn't being used for anything else, why not make it into something useful? Right now since core-image-minimal overrides IMAGE_INSTALL you can't use IMAGE_FEATURES and POKY_EXTRA_INSTALL to extend it, nor does it have package management that some users would be expecting; I think it would be useful to have a base image where those mechanisms do work. (Maybe the term "minimal" wouldn't apply to this image.) Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre