On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Daiane Angolini <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Otavio Salvador > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Nikolay Dimitrov <[email protected]> wrote: >>> So, in terms of functionality this kernel sits somewhere between >>> mainline and FSL releases, is that correct? >> >> Yes; it is FSL release + stable releases + vendor/community fixes > > I've been thinking about this issue. And this provider (for imx6 only) > may make sense to have "fslc" sufix, exactly because it has freescale > + community patches > > However, the other (currently linux-fslc) does not make sense. Maybe > linux-cmt makes more sense today. > > I remember one of the arguments to not use only "linux" and use a > prefix was that it's not a pure mainline provider (it clones from > github) and because it leave the "linux" only for internal kernels > > Any other suggestion?
I think we need to consider some things here: linux-fslc is a kernel tree we maintain u-boot-fslc is a u-boot tree we maintain both have same goals and the idea is to provide a place to share patches and backports. The motivation to make the 3.14 is because FSL is not taking the fixes and security updates from stable, so a place to merge those seems to be beneficial. I don't want a plethora of names as it makes harder for people to contribute and share work so I propose two solutions: linux-fslc_4.0.bb linux-fslc-mx6_3.14-1.0.x.bb or linux-fslc_4.0.bb linux-fslc_3.14-1.0.x-mx6.bb Both works. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
