Date
1 - 2 of 2
[RFC][WIP]{honister] kernel-lab manual
Tim Orling
I have the restructured text conversion far enough along for the 'kernel-lab' to share it now. Because I was last working on this for Yocto Project Summit 2021.11, the current qemux86 base is on 'honister' (although I am upgrading it to honister-3.4.4 tag). Please realize there is a lot of history to this material and some of it was done by folks that have left this mortal coil and some respect for that posterity is included in this work. We can change and morph in the future, once it has been captured close to what it is here. I also have a separate workflow going for the Yocto Project Summit 2022.05 which is in Google Slides and is qemuarm64 based ('kirkstone'). Eventually I will find the time to update the kernel-lab manual to follow suit, but our collective discussion may impact that. You can take a look at YP Summit 2021.11 to see a preview of what is coming for YP Summit 2022.05 (once I figure out the pesky printk/pr_info issue): Current working branch of kernel-lab manual: https://github.com/moto-timo/yocto-docs/tree/timo/honister/kernel-lab And the accompanying metadata training materials: The intent is that for a given release of the docs, we would have exercises for LTS, Stable and Mainline (really this means current-stable, not -dev). Currently, LTS would be 5.10, Stable would be 5.15 and Mainline would be 5.17. --Tim
|
|
Michael Opdenacker
Hi Tim
Many thanks for these instructions, and sorry for the late reply. However, I wouldn't have forgotten to review it if you had copied the docs@ mailing list ;-) On 5/12/22 20:10, Tim Orling wrote: I have the restructured text conversion far enough along for the The whole instructions look very good and ready for inclusion when the mentioned repository for the lab layers exists. I'm starting to run them. How should we proceed? I'd suggest to: * Publish the repository for the lab layers at the specified location * Submit the sources to the docs@ mailing list for public review. I have a few minor issues to report, and this could happen then. What do you think? So far, there's just one thing that bothers me a bit: the .bb or .conf files that we are supposed to open could be useful to show directly in the documentation. It looks a bit strange to talk about the contents of a file without showing it at the same time. I know, there's a risk to see them getting out of sync with the actual sources. Maybe we can find a way to include the contents of files from branches in cloned repositories. This would be handy in many places... Thanks again, Cheers Michael. -- Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
|
|