meta-ti layer confusion

meta-ti layer confusion

[Steffen Sledz]

Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.

That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.

[1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".

A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.

So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?

Which one should we use? And why?

BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?

Regards,
Steffen

[1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
[2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
[3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: meta-ti layer confusion

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
> 
> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
> 
> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
> 
> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
> 
> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
> 
> Which one should we use? And why?
> 
> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
> 
> Regards,
> Steffen
> 
> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>

They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
master branch though, until they are accepted...

-- 
Denys

Re: meta-ti layer confusion

[Steffen Sledz]

On 20.04.2012 15:20, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
>>
>> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
>>
>> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
>>
>> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
>>
>> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
>>
>> Which one should we use? And why?
>>
>> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steffen
>>
>> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
>> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
>> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>
> 
> They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
> layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
> considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
> subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
> review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
> that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
> master branch though, until they are accepted...

Why are they both listed in [1]?

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: meta-ti layer confusion

[Steffen Sledz]

On 20.04.2012 15:47, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> On 20.04.2012 15:20, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
>>>
>>> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
>>>
>>> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
>>>
>>> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
>>>
>>> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
>>>
>>> Which one should we use? And why?
>>>
>>> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Steffen
>>>
>>> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
>>> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
>>> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>
>>
>> They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
>> layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
>> considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
>> subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
>> review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
>> that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
>> master branch though, until they are accepted...
> 
> Why are they both listed in [1]?

Any objections if i remove [3] from the LayerIndex?

After your comments i think that this one is just a kind of a staging area.

Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: meta-ti layer confusion

[Koen Kooi]

Op 25 apr. 2012, om 08:08 heeft Steffen Sledz het volgende geschreven:

> On 20.04.2012 15:47, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>> On 20.04.2012 15:20, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
>>>> 
>>>> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
>>>> 
>>>> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
>>>> 
>>>> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
>>>> 
>>>> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
>>>> 
>>>> Which one should we use? And why?
>>>> 
>>>> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Steffen
>>>> 
>>>> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
>>>> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
>>>> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>
>>> 
>>> They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
>>> layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
>>> considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
>>> subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
>>> review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
>>> that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
>>> master branch though, until they are accepted...
>> 
>> Why are they both listed in [1]?
> 
> Any objections if i remove [3] from the LayerIndex?

Yes

> 
> After your comments i think that this one is just a kind of a staging area.

And you're thinking wrong

Re: meta-ti layer confusion

[Steffen Sledz]

On 25.04.2012 08:19, Koen Kooi wrote:
> 
> Op 25 apr. 2012, om 08:08 heeft Steffen Sledz het volgende geschreven:
> 
>> On 20.04.2012 15:47, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>> On 20.04.2012 15:20, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>>> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
>>>>>
>>>>> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
>>>>>
>>>>> Which one should we use? And why?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Steffen
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
>>>>> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
>>>>> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>
>>>>
>>>> They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
>>>> layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
>>>> considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
>>>> subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
>>>> review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
>>>> that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
>>>> master branch though, until they are accepted...
>>>
>>> Why are they both listed in [1]?
>>
>> Any objections if i remove [3] from the LayerIndex?
> 
> Yes

Which objections are these?

Why are they both *needed* in the LayerIndex?

>> After your comments i think that this one is just a kind of a staging area.
> 
> And you're thinking wrong

So please explain this to us.

What we've seen in the last days is that there were commits in [3] which were not accepted at that moment. In the moment they got accepted they made their way to [2]. I would call this a staging area.

Regards,
Steffen

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058

Re: meta-ti layer confusion

[Steffen Sledz]

On 25.04.2012 09:49, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> On 25.04.2012 08:19, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 25 apr. 2012, om 08:08 heeft Steffen Sledz het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On 20.04.2012 15:47, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>> On 20.04.2012 15:20, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>>>> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which one should we use? And why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Steffen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
>>>>>> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
>>>>>> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
>>>>> layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
>>>>> considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
>>>>> subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
>>>>> review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
>>>>> that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
>>>>> master branch though, until they are accepted...
>>>>
>>>> Why are they both listed in [1]?
>>>
>>> Any objections if i remove [3] from the LayerIndex?
>>
>> Yes
> 
> Which objections are these?
> 
> Why are they both *needed* in the LayerIndex?
> 
>>> After your comments i think that this one is just a kind of a staging area.
>>
>> And you're thinking wrong
> 
> So please explain this to us.
> 
> What we've seen in the last days is that there were commits in [3] which were not accepted at that moment. In the moment they got accepted they made their way to [2]. I would call this a staging area.

Ping!

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058