On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 05:31:23PM -0600, Bajjuri, Praneeth wrote: > > > On 12/17/2020 3:42 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >There's no need for ti-optee-os fork any more, as it's exactly the same as > >upstream > > Thanks Denys for the fix. > > This along with the meta-ti patch helped in building 3.11 on sdk builds. > > One question though, While there is no difference today between TI > and upstream optee, Any reason why we cannot use the forked project? > Similar to how we are doing with ATF today ?
Praneeth, >From the community perspective, it's a bad practice to fork an upstream project "just in case", when there are no real differences... Denys > >Signed-off-by: Denys Dmytriyenko <[email protected]> > >--- > > meta-arago-distro/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bbappend | 7 ------- > > 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) > > delete mode 100644 > > meta-arago-distro/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bbappend > > > >diff --git a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bbappend > >b/meta-arago-distro/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bbappend > >deleted file mode 100644 > >index 677c6dd..0000000 > >--- a/meta-arago-distro/recipes-security/optee/optee-os_git.bbappend > >+++ /dev/null > >@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@ > >-PR_append = ".arago0" > >- > >-SRC_URI = "git://git.ti.com/optee/ti-optee-os.git;branch=${BRANCH} \ > >- file://0001-allow-setting-sysroot-for-libgcc-lookup.patch \ > >-" > >-BRANCH = "ti-optee-os" > >-SRCREV = "199fca17b575d4c748c9c435e908a6ec9618c75a" > > _______________________________________________ meta-arago mailing list [email protected] http://arago-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meta-arago
