From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-bk0-f48.google.com (mail-bk0-f48.google.com [209.85.214.48]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A515CE0132F for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bkvi18 with SMTP id i18so1754893bkv.35 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:49:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=fZnvKbPxxLNcerAKpyyMVPXfng/StuTNENjLNhAhplA=; b=ZO2/jneVq02GJZsUrUlaIDZcEWEhS7UK6DVGoScZFZuX3cFFCKZ+LC+wIjPAorZoSQ 4tE5NYl1iJEUbR3UZiGmKNBjUap+RVWD+EmDTg40MYV3KdH26RTPx7CGXCZYXETWTomo nlx1t/0tpDYtBmSGyHw6VzSB3SiU6K5DK3FZn0Q4o/5Sa1T6tR/GXTaLvU42/gajThDA lGlct/rGtIozmvUHaqPXdli8dR2QFEE9fnWA53lZqXD4stQ/BvcqL1SbMVrZe7BU28sB aTmRjgtaEaq/QcOpBdTF4HAdM4QTMDJg1qD3S7AGnqvMTTYi0NTBw6cI/t1SXa2tIq0W 6djg== Received: by 10.204.156.141 with SMTP id x13mr496659bkw.50.1335340151776; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fensuse.internal.dresearch-fe.de (pd95cb174.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [217.92.177.116]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id zx16sm36542340bkb.13.2012.04.25.00.49.10 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F97AC74.9070900@dresearch-fe.de> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:49:08 +0200 From: Steffen Sledz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120328 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Koen Kooi , meta-ti@yoctoproject.org References: <4F910E4F.9000800@dresearch-fe.de> <20120420132050.GA3783@denix.org> <4F9168F4.50306@dresearch-fe.de> <4F9794F0.20706@dresearch-fe.de> <17B574FF-1E81-4D65-8C70-439CCC24974D@dominion.thruhere.net> In-Reply-To: <17B574FF-1E81-4D65-8C70-439CCC24974D@dominion.thruhere.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkjWZxl2f+vGJpckQqwJbjUsr5zPvVdh7qQv++ottLhwp9YOVgx6Ug9qQdrVcqQJggfVzx+ Subject: Re: meta-ti layer confusion X-BeenThere: meta-ti@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Mailing list for the meta-ti layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 07:49:14 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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] >>>>> [2] >>>>> [3] >>>> >>>> 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