On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Otavio, > > > On 06/17/2015 09:39 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 06/17/2015 09:30 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 06/17/2015 09:02 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This recipe provides the FSL Community's i.MX6 Linux which is a Linux >>>>>> kernel based on Freescale 3.14.28-1.0.0 GA release, used by FSL >>>>>> Community BSP in order to provide support for i.MX6 based platforms. >>>>>> >>>>>> The fork includes the official Linux kernel stable updates, backported >>>>>> features and fixes coming from the vendors, kernel community or FSL >>>>>> Community itself. >>>>>> >>>>>> This version is based on 3.14.44 stable release and includes following >>>>>> changes on top of both kernels: >>>>>> >>>>>> 9e71c2c ARM: imx_v6_v7_defconfig: Enable kexec support >>>>>> 3b15ffa Revert "net: fec: fix the warning found by dma debug" >>>>>> 3183696 mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: Fixup runtime PM conditions during >>>>>> ->probe() >>>>>> 434d1b2 ARM: 8338/1: kexec: Relax SMP validation to improve DT >>>>>> compatibility >>>>>> 33bb67d gpio: generic: clamp retured value to [0,1] >>>>>> 192f32d ARM: imx6sl: Disable imx6sl-specific code when imx6sl SOC >>>>>> support >>>>>> is disabled >>>>>> >>>>>> Change-Id: I0d5b21a0381c64b323c73cded73a93a4f218f50d >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <[email protected]> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc-mx6/defconfig | 414 >>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc-mx6_3.14-1.0.x.bb | 16 + >>>>>> 2 files changed, 430 insertions(+) >>>>>> create mode 100644 recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc-mx6/defconfig >>>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>>> recipes-kernel/linux/linux-fslc-mx6_3.14-1.0.x.bb >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I personally think that the naming of this kernel will cause confusion. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Any suggestion? >>> >>> >>> >>> Anything that doesn't contain "fslc", like "linux-fsl", "linux-imx", >>> "linux-imx6" or similar. >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> >> I think it is important to provide the credit to fslc as this is not >> an fsl initiative or a generic imx kernel. > > > I think the credit already goes everywhere - source code license, > author's rights in each file, etc. To be honest, I was thinking mostly > about functionality and not about credit.
I'm OK with revisiting this kernel provider naming topic. Because it's always healthy to rework or reorganize, and because it's a while (I think more than 3 years?) that we had this discussion in the past. So, I do want to hear suggestions as well. However, if this kernel provider get a name change, linux-fslc must follow the same pattern. At the end, they point to the same git repository, which is going to follow the same pattern as well. Daiane > > So, in terms of functionality this kernel sits somewhere between > mainline and FSL releases, is that correct? > > Regards, > Nikolay > > -- > _______________________________________________ > meta-freescale mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
