Re: meta-baryon flexibility

Jim Abernathy

On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Joshua Lock <josh@...> wrote:

On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 15:24 -0400, Jim Abernathy wrote:
> In an effort to explore how independent a layer could be to the
> underlying hardware, I took the meta-baryon NAS layer and got it built
> from master using the n450 BSP.  With that working I decided to replace
> the n450 with sugarbay.  While the n450 can support X11 and sato, it was
> not generated by design in the baryon build.
> However, when I changed to sugarbay, the build stops because X11 is
> needed.  To get around this I had to comment out some things in the
> conf/machine/sugarbay.conf file in the BSP.
> #           ${XSERVER_IA32_EXT} \
> #           ${XSERVER_IA32_I965} \
> #           "
> #VA_FEATURES ?= "gst-va-intel va-intel"
> Why didn't I have to do this in the n450??

The key piece is the MACHINE_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS, which is telling Poky to
recommend the gst-va-intel and va-intel recipes when building this

RRECOMMENDS are automatically installed as a dependency (in this case,
of task-machine-base, see task-base.bbclass) but can be removed without
causing the package which pulled it in to be removed (see the Poky
reference manual glossary on *_RRECOMMENDS).

I'd suggest the RRECOMMENDS actually be added at a more granular level
than the machine. Perhaps you could file a bug against the BSP?

So if I understand this, it would be better for one of the files that focused on media to include this particular RRECOMMENDS statement.  That way others not interested in media and graphic could still use the BSP unchanged.
In my case the baryon build would work without modifiying the BSP????
Jim A

yocto mailing list

Join to automatically receive all group messages.