[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH 1/3] u-boot: Rename recipe to u-boot-fsl

Otavio Salvador otavio at ossystems.com.br
Fri Dec 14 10:12:34 PST 2012

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com> wrote:
> Le Fri, 14 Dec 2012 14:50:07 -0200,
> Daiane Angolini <daiane.angolini at freescale.com> a écrit :
>> In the other hand, we may rename our u-boot recipe to
>> u-boot-somethingelse. This way, we have to face less support, and no
>> need to teach anyone how to fix their layer.
>> How I'm lazy, I would choose the renaming option.
>> If I'm wrong on any point, please let me know. I'm not sure I completely
>> understand the issue here, so I may be simplistic in my interpretation.
> how often have you seen a support request concerning a u-boot problem
> here ?
> BTW, you will have some issues if someone has a qt recipe or bbappend is
> its overlay so why don't you also rename qt to qt-fslc (espaciallyas you
> add a patch to it in meta-fsl-arm so it's no more mainline) ?

The real difference here is how ofthen someone will need to override a
qt recipe, for something board specific, and how ofthen it will be for
u-boot/kernel. I bet the former will be much more rare.

Most BSP ports, for customers, will involve kernel and u-boot changes
and ofthen enough you'll have an specific repository for your
u-boot/kernel so an u-boot-<customer> will be common in internal BSPs
and layers. We do it for our customers, I bet WR does the same.

Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio at ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

More information about the meta-freescale mailing list