meta-arm layer update

meta-arm layer update

[jon.mason]

The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/

It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
like to contribute to read
https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md


Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
index.  Specifically,
http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/

The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
definition in it, and generally being empty.  I will attempt to add it
again once code has been pushed to that location.


Thanks,
Jon
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Nicolas Dechesne]

hi Jon!

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
>
> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
>
> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> like to contribute to read
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md

many thanks for starting this effort!

Some initial comments/thoughts:

1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
looking into that soon.
2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
(juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
change their distro config.
3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication

>
>
> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> index.  Specifically,
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
>
> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> definition in it, and generally being empty.  I will attempt to add it
> again once code has been pushed to that location.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jon
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
> 

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Khem Raj]

Hi Nico and Jon

I think the current layer is a jumbo layer and it has

- A machine layer
- A Distro layer
- A Generic recipes layer

I think mixing this way it going to be not crisp. Perhaps, iota can
use poky-tiny

Thanks
-Khem
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM Nicolas Dechesne
<nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> hi Jon!
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
> >
> > It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> > like to contribute to read
> > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
>
> many thanks for starting this effort!
>
> Some initial comments/thoughts:
>
> 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> looking into that soon.
> 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> change their distro config.
> 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
>
> >
> >
> > Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> > index.  Specifically,
> > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
> >
> > The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> > definition in it, and generally being empty.  I will attempt to add it
> > again once code has been pushed to that location.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jon
> > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
> > 

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Jon Mason]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:41 AM Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Nico and Jon
>
> I think the current layer is a jumbo layer and it has
>
> - A machine layer
> - A Distro layer
> - A Generic recipes layer
>
> I think mixing this way it going to be not crisp. Perhaps, iota can
> use poky-tiny

Not sure I follow.  Is the problem that there are too many divergent
things in the jumbo layer or is it a potential problem with
meta-arm-iota?

Thanks,
Jon


>
> Thanks
> -Khem
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM Nicolas Dechesne
> <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > hi Jon!
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
> > >
> > > It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> > > like to contribute to read
> > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
> >
> > many thanks for starting this effort!
> >
> > Some initial comments/thoughts:
> >
> > 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> > maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> > looking into that soon.
> > 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> > are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> > (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> > If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> > change their distro config.
> > 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> > should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> > > index.  Specifically,
> > > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> > > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
> > >
> > > The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> > > definition in it, and generally being empty.  I will attempt to add it
> > > again once code has been pushed to that location.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jon
> > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
> > >
> 

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Nicolas Dechesne]

khem,

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 5:41 PM Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Nico and Jon
>
> I think the current layer is a jumbo layer and it has
>
> - A machine layer
> - A Distro layer
> - A Generic recipes layer

meta-arm (the top level) is a layer collection. is that what you are
complaining about? e.g. would you rather have each individual layer in
their own tree? During initial review I insisted on having multiple
layers for each purpose, for sure.. but I thought having a layer
collection would still be ok.

>
> I think mixing this way it going to be not crisp. Perhaps, iota can
> use poky-tiny
>
> Thanks
> -Khem
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM Nicolas Dechesne
> <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > hi Jon!
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
> > >
> > > It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> > > like to contribute to read
> > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
> >
> > many thanks for starting this effort!
> >
> > Some initial comments/thoughts:
> >
> > 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> > maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> > looking into that soon.
> > 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> > are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> > (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> > If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> > change their distro config.
> > 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> > should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> > > index.  Specifically,
> > > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> > > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
> > >
> > > The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> > > definition in it, and generally being empty.  I will attempt to add it
> > > again once code has been pushed to that location.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jon
> > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
> > > 

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Khem Raj]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 9:05 AM Nicolas Dechesne
<nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> khem,
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 5:41 PM Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Nico and Jon
> >
> > I think the current layer is a jumbo layer and it has
> >
> > - A machine layer
> > - A Distro layer
> > - A Generic recipes layer
>
> meta-arm (the top level) is a layer collection. is that what you are
> complaining about? e.g. would you rather have each individual layer in
> their own tree? During initial review I insisted on having multiple
> layers for each purpose, for sure.. but I thought having a layer
> collection would still be ok.

Generally, if it was multiple similar kind of layers then it works ok
as its easy but having
machine, and distro in same layer might be different, Since distro
layers also come with
there workspace setup methods e.g. gitsubmods, android repo etc.
We have to run YP compliance on each layer separately anyway.

>
> >
> > I think mixing this way it going to be not crisp. Perhaps, iota can
> > use poky-tiny
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Khem
> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM Nicolas Dechesne
> > <nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > hi Jon!
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> > > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
> > > >
> > > > It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> > > > like to contribute to read
> > > > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
> > >
> > > many thanks for starting this effort!
> > >
> > > Some initial comments/thoughts:
> > >
> > > 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> > > maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> > > looking into that soon.
> > > 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> > > are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> > > (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> > > If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> > > change their distro config.
> > > 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> > > should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> > > > index.  Specifically,
> > > > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> > > > http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
> > > >
> > > > The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> > > > definition in it, and generally being empty.  I will attempt to add it
> > > > again once code has been pushed to that location.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jon
> > > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
> > > > 

Re: meta-arm layer update

[Bertrand]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2681 bytes --]

Hi Khem,

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:

> 
> hi Jon!
> 
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
> 
>> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
>> 
>> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
>> like to contribute to read
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
> 
> many thanks for starting this effort!
> 
> Some initial comments/thoughts:
> 
> 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> looking into that soon.
> 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> change their distro config.

In order to have a working setup on Juno, I need to enable usb and usb mass storage.
The other solution could be to enable this directly in the kernel configuration and not using the DISTRO_FEATURES but the someone activating or turning off those features would not get the wanted behaviour.
What would be your suggestion here to solve this issue ?

> 
> 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication

Definitely agree here. Maybe the definition should just be remove in 96boards after checking that we provide the same functionalities.
When I implemented the Juno BSP, I did check the 96boards so I think we have at least the same features in meta-arm but it would be good to have an other check on this.

> 
> 
> 
>> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
>> index. Specifically,
>> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
>> 
>> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
>> 
>> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
>> definition in it, and generally being empty. I will attempt to add it
>> again once code has been pushed to that location.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Jon
>> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
>> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
>> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
>> information in any medium. Thank you.
> 
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3293 bytes --]

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Nicolas Dechesne]

On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:30 AM Bertrand <bertrand.marquis@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Khem,
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
>
> hi Jon!
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
>
> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
>
> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> like to contribute to read
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
>
> many thanks for starting this effort!
>
> Some initial comments/thoughts:
>
> 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> looking into that soon.
> 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> change their distro config.
>
> In order to have a working setup on Juno, I need to enable usb and usb mass storage.
> The other solution could be to enable this directly in the kernel configuration and not using the DISTRO_FEATURES but the someone activating or turning off those features would not get the wanted behaviour.

That's fine. If someone disable usbhost and/or usbgadget in their
DISTRO, they should be able to. If Juno 'requires' these features ,
then you can document that in the README file as well.

> What would be your suggestion here to solve this issue ?

You need to enable usbhost and usbgadget in MACHINE_FEATURES , which
you've done already. Then for the testing you need to use a distro
which has usbhost and usbgadget already enabled by default (which is
the case on OE core nodistro and poky, iirc). If you use a distro
where it's not enabled, then you need to provide a setup script that
will update the distro accordingly.

But forcing the DISTRO variable in the BSP layer is considered bad
practice, for sure.

>
> 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
>
> Definitely agree here. Maybe the definition should just be remove in 96boards after checking that we provide the same functionalities.
> When I implemented the Juno BSP, I did check the 96boards so I think we have at least the same features in meta-arm but it would be good to have an other check on this.

ok, we will need to have a look at that...

>
>
> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> index. Specifically,
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
>
> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> definition in it, and generally being empty. I will attempt to add it
> again once code has been pushed to that location.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jon
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
>
> 

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Bertrand]

Hi,

> On 13 Jan 2020, at 11:13, Nicolas Dechesne via Lists.Yoctoproject.Org <nicolas.dechesne=linaro.org@lists.yoctoproject.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:30 AM Bertrand <bertrand.marquis@arm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Khem,
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:
>> 
>> hi Jon!
>> 
>> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
>> 
>> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
>> like to contribute to read
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
>> 
>> many thanks for starting this effort!
>> 
>> Some initial comments/thoughts:
>> 
>> 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
>> maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
>> looking into that soon.
>> 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
>> are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
>> (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
>> If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
>> change their distro config.
>> 
>> In order to have a working setup on Juno, I need to enable usb and usb mass storage.
>> The other solution could be to enable this directly in the kernel configuration and not using the DISTRO_FEATURES but the someone activating or turning off those features would not get the wanted behaviour.
> 
> That's fine. If someone disable usbhost and/or usbgadget in their
> DISTRO, they should be able to. If Juno 'requires' these features ,
> then you can document that in the README file as well.
> 
>> What would be your suggestion here to solve this issue ?
> 
> You need to enable usbhost and usbgadget in MACHINE_FEATURES , which
> you've done already. Then for the testing you need to use a distro
> which has usbhost and usbgadget already enabled by default (which is
> the case on OE core nodistro and poky, iirc). If you use a distro
> where it's not enabled, then you need to provide a setup script that
> will update the distro accordingly.
> 
> But forcing the DISTRO variable in the BSP layer is considered bad
> practice, for sure.

For now the images built are taking the assumption that the root filesystem will be on a USB mass storage (command line, device name etc) and that’s why I enabled those features.
I will disable those in juno.conf and give more documentation on the README for juno on this.

I thought that usbhost was not enabled by default and that’s why I forced it in juno.conf. I will check why I had issues before adding this.
Anyway I will fix that.

> 
>> 
>> 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
>> should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
>> 
>> Definitely agree here. Maybe the definition should just be remove in 96boards after checking that we provide the same functionalities.
>> When I implemented the Juno BSP, I did check the 96boards so I think we have at least the same features in meta-arm but it would be good to have an other check on this.
> 
> ok, we will need to have a look at that...
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
>> index. Specifically,
>> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
>> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
>> 
>> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
>> definition in it, and generally being empty. I will attempt to add it
>> again once code has been pushed to that location.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Jon
>> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: meta-arm layer update

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1447 bytes --]

Hi, Jon,

It is nice to finally and accidentally discover your secret lair, I mean layer! :) I still blame myself for not paying close attention, but I googled over and over and still couldn't find any public announcements anywhere... Why is such a big secret? :)

--
Denys

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 02:35 PM, Jon Mason wrote:

> 
> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
> 
> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> like to contribute to read
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
> 
> 
> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> index. Specifically,
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> 
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
> 
> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> definition in it, and generally being empty. I will attempt to add it
> again once code has been pushed to that location.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Jon
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1982 bytes --]

Re: [meta-arm] meta-arm layer update

[Jon Mason]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 6:42 PM Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
>
> Hi, Jon,
>
> It is nice to finally and accidentally discover your secret lair, I mean layer! :) I still blame myself for not paying close attention, but I googled over and over and still couldn't find any public announcements anywhere... Why is such a big secret? :)

The first rule about meta-arm is don't talk about meta-arm.  Wait,
that's fight club.  Nevermind...

meta-arm is still relatively new, but I need to do a better job about
publicizing it.  Thank you for pointing this out.

Thanks,
Jon

>
> --
> Denys
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 02:35 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
>
> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
>
> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
> like to contribute to read
> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
>
>
> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
> index. Specifically,
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
>
> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
> definition in it, and generally being empty. I will attempt to add it
> again once code has been pushed to that location.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Jon
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
>
> 

Re: meta-arm layer update

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2079 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 12:33 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote:

> 
> hi Jon!
> 
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:35 PM Jon Mason <jon.mason@arm.com> wrote:
> 
>> The meta-arm layer is now publicly available at
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/
>> 
>> It is still under active development, and I encourage everyone who would
>> like to contribute to read
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-arm/tree/README.md
> 
> many thanks for starting this effort!
> 
> Some initial comments/thoughts:
> 
> 1. We are interested in moving the OP-TEE recipes that we've
> maintained in meta-linaro for quite some time, over there. We will be
> looking into that soon.

Nico,

Do you have a timeline for this transition? Thanks.

Denys

> 
> 2. I have very quickly browsed through the files, and noticed that you
> are setting DISTRO_FEATURES within machine configuration meta data
> (juno.conf), this really needs to be removed, as it's a bad practice.
> If someone builds their own distro/apps for 'juno' you shouldn't
> change their distro config.
> 3. We have some juno machine definition in meta-96boards, and we
> should look at cleaning things up a bit to avoid duplication
> 
> 
>> 
>> Also, some of the layers are now present on the OpenEmbedded layer
>> index. Specifically,
>> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm-bsp/
>> 
>> http://layers.openembedded.org/layerindex/branch/master/layer/meta-arm/
>> 
>> The meta-arm-iota layer was rejected due to not having a distro
>> definition in it, and generally being empty. I will attempt to add it
>> again once code has been pushed to that location.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Jon
>> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
>> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
>> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
>> information in any medium. Thank you.
> 
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2669 bytes --]