From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.windriver.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A154165CC9 for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 06:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCB.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hcb.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.41]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s8A6StDr022387 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 23:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.181] (128.224.162.181) by ALA-HCB.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 23:28:54 -0700 Message-ID: <540FEFA4.6030109@windriver.com> Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 14:28:52 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Darren Hart , "Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org" References: In-Reply-To: Cc: "Brandt, Todd E" , Koen Kooi , Tom Zanussi Subject: Re: Packaging kernel sources X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 06:29:19 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Good idea, how about use the name linux-source, but add "custom" in the summary or description. // Robert On 09/10/2014 08:42 AM, Darren Hart wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources > installed on the target. The kernel-dev package as defined by > kernel.bbclass is heavily pruned to minimize packaging time and size and > is intended to enable building of external modules on the target. > > Is there an accepted best-practice for how to get the full source packaged > and installed? I can easily write a new recipe, > linux-custom-source_git.bb, to install the sources, for example, without > impacting the packaging time of "virtual/kernel" package. > > It would be nice in some respects for it to all come from the same recipe > though, but I suspect the impact to the common-case where this is not need > would be far too great. > > Koen, I believe you had a solution for this with Angstrom? >