On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 3:21 AM, Daniel F. Dickinson
<csho...@thecshore.com> wrote:
> On 01/02/18 09:19 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>
>> On 1 February 2018 at 14:17, Daniel F. Dickinson <csho...@thecshore.com
>> <mailto:csho...@thecshore.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 01/02/18 09:12 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>
>>         On 1 February 2018 at 14:10, Daniel F. Dickinson
>>         <csho...@thecshore.com <mailto:csho...@thecshore.com>
>>         <mailto:csho...@thecshore.com <mailto:csho...@thecshore.com>>>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>              On 01/02/18 08:54 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>
>>                  On 1 February 2018 at 13:44, Daniel F. Dickinson
>>
>>                  wrote:
>>
>>         A distribution can set other recipe's PACKAGECONFIGs directly:
>>
>>         PACKAGECONFIG_pn-recipename = "foo bar"
>>
>>         And distributions are welcome to bundle groups of those into inc
>>         files for the user to pull in as required at the distro level.
>>
>>     I wonder if it'd be useful to have some .inc's of this variety added
>>     and included (commented out) in the poky-tiny distro default
>> local.conf?
>>
>>
>> Included and enabled if they make sense, sure.  poky-tiny is, like
>> everything poky-specific, just an example.
>>
>> It already has one:
>>
>> PACKAGECONFIG_remove_pn-opkg-utils = "python"
>>
> Sorry, apparently I wasn't clear.  What I meant was having (either in poky
> or in a more appropriate place) .inc or classes that do PACKAGECONFIG for
> common sets of packages for various "tiny" use cases (e.g. router, nas
> firmware (v.s os on data disks), ap, small iot devices , etc), which may
> involve a lot of partitioning of existing packages to allow for smaller
> (tiny) builds that include only the relevant functionality.  I'm not sure
> what the situation is for oe-core, but when I look at meta-openwrt it is
> much less partitioned than say actual openwrt base system, and makes a
> number of 'bigger' choices than openwrt.  What I'd like to work on is making
> it easier to build pared down OE systems (whether poky-tiny reference design
> 'flavours', meta-openwrt/oe hybrids, or (basically) openwrt build with
> oe/meta-openwrt).
>
> In the case of the .inc's etc I'm thinking of this as 'pre-cooked'
> references designs like poky-tiny itself;  Perhaps a better place for this
> is as comments in poky-tiny's distro .conf? (Or as proof-of-concept distro
> layers based on poky-tiny and and listed in the layers index?)

I'd say it could be a layer with those. Like meta-tiny-common or
similar which other distros could include and use. This does not seem
to belong to poky.

-- 
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
-- 
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to