[meta-freescale] [PATCH][fsl-community-bsp-base] setup-environment: provide a MACHINE menu
otavio at ossystems.com.br
Thu Mar 27 12:12:20 PDT 2014
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Trevor Woerner
<trevor.woerner at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 03/27/14 14:08, Daiane.Angolini at freescale.com wrote:
>>> Traditionally I've been hesitant to send patches, but I've decided to not
>>> be as shy anymore. Therefore I don't expect everything I send to be
>>> successful :-)
>> Yes, please, don't be shy anymore and send all patches you have ;-)
> The can of worms is now open :-)
>> I like your patch. But it have several important problems.
>> 1) assign a number to a board may lead user to error. I love the machine list, and I love that imx53qsb is 20, but when a new board is added I will try to use 20 and it will not be imx53qsb. This is only one example, and this only happens if you use a dynamic order for the machine list.
> I hadn't thought of that, but I agree completely.
>> 2) it only list machines from meta-fsl-arm and meta-fsl-arm-extra. I tried
>> MACHINE="qemuarm" source setup-environment build
>> And I faced a big error message!
> Whoops! I hadn't tested the emulators, but I agree they should certainly
> be in the list too. Getting a big error message isn't what I wanted to
> have happen.
Not sure I'd list those. But I'd like others to comment on this.
>> I´m not sure if we want to list external boards, but it looks weird to me not being able to have a qemu build dir.
> By "external boards" I assume you mean non-ARM or non-freescale boards
> (e.g. beagle)? If so, I don't think we should worry too much about
> listing external boards, setup-environment comes from a
> freescale-specific repository. If someone is following the steps to
> checkout and build for a freescale board (and therefore using
> setup-environment), I think it's a safe enough assumption they're going
> to want to build for one of the boards supported by the freescale BSP
> repositories (or qemu). I don't think it's too much to say that someone
> would be in the wrong place if they were complaining that the freescale
> setup script didn't include options to build for a MIPS64 target :-)
> In other words, I believe the setup-environment script provided in
> fsl-community-bsp-base is already freescale-specific. Making it more so
> shouldn't be a problem?
>> 3) In error message, instead of list all boards one before the other, list one machine per line.
>> I like to prompt user instead of assuming a default machine. But a list of machines is not good when you have 150 machines. And I start to try to group the machines in SOC family, or in meta-fsl-arm/meta-fsl-arm-extra, or any other criteria to help user to decide it.
> Actually, an early version of my script did that, but I thought it was
> too "text-y" so I shortened it to just the machine name. I figure the
> person has the board sitting there, they know the board name, so finding
> that name in a list that is sorted alphabetically shouldn't be too hard :-D
> But in this decision you can also see my bias. I don't look at the
> boards as being either from freescale or not, so sorting them that way
> is not something I would do by default :-)
I am not sure we ought to split between reference boards and 3rd party
ones. I think what Daiane means here is:
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
More information about the meta-freescale