yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

Is "technical FAQ" == "How-Do-I pages" ? -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel

By Darren Hart <dvhart@...> · #7490 ·

Re: how many meta-toolchain-* targets are there?

they should be documented I agree. meta-toolchain-gmae and meta-toolchain-sdk are synonymous.

By Khem Raj · #7489 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

since the ubiquitous reaction to complaining about something is always, "don't just whine, do something about it," i'm doing that. i've started a personal yocto FAQ, based on questions either

By Robert P. J. Day · #7488 ·

Re: BSP for taskit stamp9g20

nice! and no problem at all. Cheers, Bruce

By Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...> · #7487 ·

Re: BSP for taskit stamp9g20

Yhea! My first successful build! Thank you very much! <bruce.ashfield@...> wrote: -- __________________________________________________________________ IMKO Micromodultechnik GmbH Markus

By Markus Hubig <mhubig@...> · #7486 ·

Re: Yocto Development Manual Appendix B question

Bruce, Should the example note this? Would it be best to specifically say to uncomment that SRC_URI line? Scott

By Rifenbark, Scott M <scott.m.rifenbark@...> · #7485 ·

Re: Yocto Development Manual Appendix B question

It should be uncommented. I commented them by default, since the extras repository is a bit of a collection ground. If they are uncommented, and combined with the AUTOREV also set in the file, you are

By Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...> · #7484 ·

Yocto Development Manual Appendix B question

In the example in The Developement Manual v1.2 in Appendix B Section B.1.7, it states that you need to put in the statement: KSRC_linux_yocto_3_2 ?= "/home/scottrif/linux-yocto-3.2.git"

By Jim Abernathy · #7483 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

Thanks all - I enjoyed the rant. The obvious point is that the FAQ needs attention. A good thing to do would be if you have a question that you would like included in a "good" FAQ, such as the one

By Rifenbark, Scott M <scott.m.rifenbark@...> · #7482 ·

Re: how many meta-toolchain-* targets are there?

toolchain-gmae is exactly the toolchain-sdk. qte is for embedded qt "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...>编写： something that could be cleared up a bit in the docs ... how

By Lu, Lianhao <lianhao.lu@...> · #7481 ·

Re: BSP for taskit stamp9g20

The BSP tool came after the sections that talk about local git trees, so the docs are still debouncing a bit. They do need to make this clear about the approaches, and that you should use one or the

By Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...> · #7480 ·

BSP for taskit stamp9g20

<bruce.ashfield@...> wrote: I'm using Yocto 1.2 at the moment ... OK so I just remove the YOCTO_KERNEL_EXTERNAL_BRANCH_stamp9g20 line? OK ... Aha this is hardly understandable from the

By Markus Hubig <mhubig@...> · #7479 ·

Re: BSP for taskit stamp9g20

This is on master ? Yocto 1.2 ? Some other release ? You don't actually have an external branch, because you made the right choice to use git to manage your BSP :P So you don't need this. This is

By Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...> · #7478 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

I'm afraid you have fallen into the yocto trap of confusing the umbrella project with the buildsystem project under that umbrella. There's an easy way to find out, everytime you hear someone state

By Koen Kooi · #7477 ·

BSP for taskit stamp9g20

Hello @all, as part of my bachelor thesis, I'm in the process of creating a custom Linux OS for the taskit Stamp9G20 (a small AT91SAM9G20 based CPU board). This is when I came across the YoctoProject.

By Markus Hubig <mhubig@...> · #7476 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

i'm sure there's a place for those less technically-oriented questions, but i will point out that on the main yocto docs page: http://www.yoctoproject.org/documentation you read: "And, you view a

By Robert P. J. Day · #7475 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

You bring up a valid point, but I think it might be worth mentioning that the current FAQ evolved from a much less technically-oriented version that was produced when the project launched. At that

By Paul Eggleton · #7474 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

Nice quote, but unfortunately based on the literal meaning the acronym rather then insight into the function of a FAQ; asking the right questions is far more important than finding answers ...

By Tomas Frydrych <tf+lists.yocto@...> · #7473 ·

Re: <rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

I would go as far as saying this is the most asked question on the list and definitely a good candidate for the FAQ. Along with: Why does package XYZ get built when XYZ has nothing to do with the

By Jack Mitchell <ml@...> · #7472 ·

<rant>the current yocto FAQ is pretty much valueless</rant>

i mentioned this to scott rifenbark privately a few days ago, but i figured i might as well antagonize a few people on the list by saying it publicly -- the yocto FAQ as it stands is pretty much

By Robert P. J. Day · #7471 ·

Messages