On 10/10/14, 15:06, "Kamble, Nitin A" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >On 10/10/14, 2:18 PM, "Darren Hart" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>On 10/10/14, 11:46, "Kamble, Nitin A" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>>On 10/10/14, 9:40 AM, "Darren Hart" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>Another concern is the statement below about not allowing for a default >>>>configuration. Like other recent changes to meta-intel, this should be >>>>an >>>>opt-in thing, and as such, the BSPs need to be able to provide >>>>defaults. >>>>The intel-corei7-64 BSP works well as it is for a number of Intel >>>>platforms, and people using those may prefer not to use the >>>>machinesetuptool. >>> >>>As mentioned earlier, it was needed for the reconfiguration of images. >>>The >>>target machine which is configured as a default target machine can be >>>used >>>for this purpose. Which makes the tool transparent to them. So I am not >>>seeing any significant issue here. I think ability to reconfigure an >>>image >>>is a great benefit for development and testing. >> >>The primary issue with eliminating the defaults from intel-corei7-64 and >>providing the default via machinesetuptool, is we then make >>machinesetuptool a requirement for that BSP for basic functionality. That >>isn't acceptable in my opinion. > >So what is the proposal? Disable machinesetuptool by default, and enable >it if you need it? Yes, opt-in should be the default policy for new features such as this. Especially when it dramatically changes the user experience (as this will do). -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center -- _______________________________________________ meta-intel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
