* meta-ti layer confusion @ 2012-04-20 7:20 Steffen Sledz 2012-04-20 13:20 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-20 7:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: meta-ti; +Cc: Denys Dmytriyenko 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-ti layer confusion 2012-04-20 7:20 meta-ti layer confusion Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-20 13:20 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2012-04-20 13:47 ` Steffen Sledz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2012-04-20 13:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steffen Sledz; +Cc: meta-ti, 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-ti layer confusion 2012-04-20 13:20 ` Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2012-04-20 13:47 ` Steffen Sledz 2012-04-25 6:08 ` Steffen Sledz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-20 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denys Dmytriyenko, meta-ti; +Cc: Denys Dmytriyenko 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-ti layer confusion 2012-04-20 13:47 ` Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-25 6:08 ` Steffen Sledz 2012-04-25 6:19 ` Koen Kooi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-25 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Denys Dmytriyenko, meta-ti; +Cc: Denys Dmytriyenko 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-ti layer confusion 2012-04-25 6:08 ` Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-25 6:19 ` Koen Kooi 2012-04-25 7:49 ` Steffen Sledz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Koen Kooi @ 2012-04-25 6:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steffen Sledz; +Cc: meta-ti 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-ti layer confusion 2012-04-25 6:19 ` Koen Kooi @ 2012-04-25 7:49 ` Steffen Sledz 2012-05-04 12:53 ` Steffen Sledz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Steffen Sledz @ 2012-04-25 7:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Koen Kooi, meta-ti 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: meta-ti layer confusion 2012-04-25 7:49 ` Steffen Sledz @ 2012-05-04 12:53 ` Steffen Sledz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Steffen Sledz @ 2012-05-04 12:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Koen Kooi, meta-ti 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-05-04 12:53 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-04-20 7:20 meta-ti layer confusion Steffen Sledz 2012-04-20 13:20 ` Denys Dmytriyenko 2012-04-20 13:47 ` Steffen Sledz 2012-04-25 6:08 ` Steffen Sledz 2012-04-25 6:19 ` Koen Kooi 2012-04-25 7:49 ` Steffen Sledz 2012-05-04 12:53 ` Steffen Sledz
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.