>-----Original Message----- >From: Dmytriyenko, Denys >Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 2:52 PM >To: Maupin, Chase >Cc: Cooper Jr., Franklin; [email protected] >Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: >Rename base file system image > >On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:28:43PM -0400, Maupin, Chase wrote: >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: [email protected] [mailto:meta-arago- >> >[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cooper Jr., Franklin >> >Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:10 PM >> >To: Dmytriyenko, Denys >> >Cc: [email protected] >> >Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base-image: >> >Rename base file system image >> > >> > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Dmytriyenko, Denys >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:52 PM >> >> To: Cooper Jr., Franklin >> >> Cc: [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: [meta-arago] [PATCH 1/2] tisdk-rootfs-base- >image: >> >Rename base >> >> file system image >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:34:44AM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko >> >wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:53:54AM -0400, Cooper Jr., >Franklin >> >wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > What was the initial reason to start naming >> >rootfs >> >> > > > > > > > > > images with >> >> > > > > > > > > > tisdk-rootfs- prefix? I remember it was >> >something >> >> > > > > > > > > > forced by the SDK >> >> > > > > > setup... >> >> > > > > > > > > [Franklin] >> >> > > > > > > > > This was before my time so I am not sure what >> >the >> >> > > > > > > > > original reasoning >> >> > > > was. >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > I do assume there might be instances where >some >> >script >> >> > > > > > > > > somewhere will need to be updated if it >refers >> >to the >> >> > > > > > > > > full image as >> >> > > > "tisdk-rootfs*" >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > So, I located the change I was talking about: >> >> > > > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta- >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> >arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=91f2be34e301deebbc75c54bbad6a5a27e25bf2 >> >> > > > > > > > c >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > The "tisdk-image class had issues" is a rather >> >vague >> >> > > > > > > > description, so I'm not sure or don't remember >> >what was >> >> > > > > > > > the problem that you had to rename the original >> >> > > > > > > > arago-tisdk-image into >> >> > > > tisdk-rootfs-image... >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > [Franklin] Ah I remember. The TARGET_IMAGES >variable >> >is used >> >> > > > > > > in two ways in that class. 1 to add a build >> >dependency and 2 >> >> > > > > > > to reference the image tarball. So the assumption >> >was that >> >> > > > > > > the recipe/package name was the same as the >> >IMAGE_BASENAME. >> >> > > > > > > So the recipe and IMAGE_BASENAME >> >> > > > > > must >> >> > > > > > > match. Otherwise the image would be built but the >> >class >> >> > > > > > > wouldn't know what tarball to look for. >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Ah, OK, this is not exactly what I was looking for. >> >Tracing >> >> > > > > > even further back shows that you added the recipe >to >> >have >> >> > > > > > IMAGE_BASENAME = >> >> > > > "tisdk-rootfs": >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > http://arago-project.org/git/?p=meta- >> >> > > > > > >> >arago.git;a=commitdiff;h=f27b1f34aee2c2cbee25a0fb5b21cdb04f16e >> >> > > > > > c4a >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Do you remember the reason for that? This image >recipe >> >was in >> >> > > > > > Classic arago, but there it had the basename >matching >> >the >> >> > > > > > recipe name. Wondering why the change? >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > [Franklin] I think I was simply trying to match the >> >filesystem >> >> > > > > tarball with the name used in previous sdks. I am >> >assuming that >> >> > > > > the SDK backend script that built the sdk renamed >those >> >filesystem files. >> >> > > > > Looking at Sitara AMSDK >> >> > > > > 05.05.01 (last oe-classic based sdk) the two >filesystem >> >tarballs >> >> > > > > were named base-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz and >> >> > > > > tisdk-rootfs-am335x-evm.tar.gz. During that time I >was >> >focused >> >> > > > > on just getting the filesystem working and wanted it >to >> >look >> >> > > > > like the output from previous sdks. I don't think I >had >> >any other reason. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Thanks! Just wanted to check if there was some sort of >> >requirement >> >> > > > for that name change. If there is not, then we can look >> >for a >> >> > > > better names for full image as well as base image. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Should we look into unifying the names for other image >> >recipes? Is >> >> > > > tisdk-rootfs- the best base we can think of? >> >> > >> >> > > [Franklin] I think it's important to separate the "arago" >> >images >> >> > > from the "sdk" images. I am currently ok with the naming >> >convention >> >> > > we use for our current images minus the one I created >this >> >patch for >> >> > > :). But I'm open to suggestions. >> >> > >> >> > I'm not really sure what do you mean by separating arago >from >> >sdk. >> >> > Arago distro is becoming the SDK, the Core TISDK one, to be >> >exact. >> >> > Other SDK products can build on top with slight variations. >> >> > >> >> > We can place more generic packagegroups and images into >> >> > meta-arago-extras and keep TISDK specific ones in meta- >arago- >> >distro. >> >> > >> >> > As of the naming convention - I'm not exactly married to >the >> >arago- >> >> > prefix for the image recipes, it was just a historic >tradition >> >- >> >> > arago-base-image, arago-console-image, etc. I'm Ok with >tisdk- >> >prefix, >> >> > but "rootfs" part always felt slightly artificial to me, as >it >> >was >> >> > forced from outside and in OE images are images and there's >no >> >need to call >> >> them rootfs. >> >> > >> >> > Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that now is the perfect >time >> >to >> >> > align on the naming convention for our images and we don't >> >need to >> >> > stick to any of the existing names... >> >> >> >> Franklin, >> >> >> >> Can you think of a unified naming for all the images, >including >> >base and full >> >> tisdk, as well as less common console and test images, that >is >> >scalable enough. As >> >> I'm thinking going back to arago-base-image and arago-tisdk- >> >image vs. >> >> simplifying it to tisdk-base-image and tisdk-full-image. Plus >it >> >has to work with >> >> your other packagegroup restructure proposal... :) >> >[Franklin] >> > >> >How about the following: >> > >> >tisdk-rootfs-base-image -> arago-full-image ( me new proposed >> >image) >> >> What will this image contain? >> >> > >> >tisdk-rootfs-image -> arago-full-sdk-image >> >> I want to differentiate between rootfs vs. sdk images. So maybe >this one is >> arago-sdk-full-rootfs-image > >Heh, I was the one who asked Franklin specifically to drop >"rootfs" part... :) >Please read the above explanation. For the most part, images are >rootfs. But I >see what you are saying - we now have these hybrid SDK images that >contain >other rootfs images, kernel/bootloader images and devkit(s). So, >how about we >clearly mark those instead of everything else with "rootfs"?
That works too > > >> >arago-base-tisdk-image -> arago-base-sdk-image >> >> arago-sdk-base-rootfs-image >> >> >arago-core-tisdk-image -> arago-core-sdk-image >> >> Keep the same >> >> >Tisdk-server-rootfs-image -> arago-server-sdk-image >> >> arago-sdk-server-rootfs-image >> >> What do you think? >> >> > >> >Since our images are in meta-arago-distro which is dependent on >> >meta-ti I think we could drop the "ti" from the image name to >make >> >it simpler. >> >Based on the above logic I would probably change our >packagegroups >> >from using tisdk and simply call it sdk. >> >But if anyone has an issue I am ok with keeping tisdk in the >> >packagegroups and images name. >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Denys >> >_______________________________________________ >> >meta-arago mailing list >> >[email protected] >> >http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago _______________________________________________ meta-arago mailing list [email protected] http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
