On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:57 PM, "Maupin, Chase" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> -----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? This contained everything that the below image contains minus SDK example applications, scripts and Matrix. >>> >>>> >>>> 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 Overall I'm ok with this and Denys addressed the only comment I had. > >> >> >>>> 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
