On Thu, 2014-11-27 at 16:17 +0100, Mike Looijmans wrote: > If I understand correctly, having two "MACHINE" share the same > MACHINE_ARCH (which is the case for several intel boards too), is not > actually allowed? > > Because you get the same kernel/bootloader for different machines then. > That's what I wanted, and that triggered me finding this issue.
Its a very good question. As things stand today, there is a one to one mapping between MACHINE_ARCH and MACHINE, the difference being the removal of invalid characters for the package namespace. That implies that no, its not allowed. The intel boards you mention do something a little different, they inject a new "arch" into the hierarchy and then several machines share that common "arch". I suspect the intel boards you mention do suffer from the issue you mention in a related way and the fix may be to s/MACHINE/PACKAGE_ARCH/ in DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE as previously mentioned. The difference is I suspect they deploy for the first machine built and then not for any other. Nitin/Darren may be interested in checking into that. > Please realize that the example is just an example. The actual problem > I'm experiencing is with the kernel and bootloader! Right, the allarch behaviour is an illustration but not the underlying problem you need to resolve (although its related). Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
