Heh, I apparently inspired Ben who three days later added cgdb native to meta-oe. Now, I gained enough motivation to retry this contribution thing. Should I submit my cross version? We cannot use the native variant due to our limited embedded system.
Martin, can you advise, please? On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Burton, Ross <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 12 August 2014 16:46, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > That layer is too big. It is nearly everything that is rejected from >>>> > meta; >>>> > ok there are some dedicated layers, like meta-networking, but it feels >>>> > like >>>> > the last resort shelter where everything can just be thrown at. >>>> > >>>> > I do not think it is just us who do not wanna pull it into their >>>> > project. >>>> > Never mind, it remains to be a feature in our layer, which is closed >>>> > source, >>>> > then. It is a pity, but I will move along. >>>> >>>> People who think its too big are welcome to copy recipes out of it and >>>> sync them manually - that's still better than not sharing the recipe. >>> >>> >>> I am unfortunately not interested in participating to something that I >>> have no intent to even test myself before submitting. meta-oe became a >>> monster can which I personally would not like to deal with. That is said >>> with due-respect. If its goal were reconsidered and split into several small >>> layers, then mayhaps... But it is not there, and I am not sure if it was any >>> soon... >>> >>> Unfortunately, this feature remains proprietary at the point of writing >>> this. As long as it works for me, I will not be too much bothered, although >>> I feel sorry for those who will need to reinvent the recipe, modulo >>> stabilization. >> >> >> But that is alright as long as everyone else finds the IMHO cumbersome >> workflow with gdb OK for debugging. I think pleasant debugging is very >> important for developers, and cgdb is still a command line based tool, >> basically a thing wrapper on top of gdb with ncurses. It is not like "ddd" >> and other heavy tools. That is why I thought with minor addition, meta could >> be increase the software development experience; gdb is just way too raw to >> be effective. But again, no one else might share this opinion, so let us >> move on. >> >> Here is a reminder screenshot for those who do not know it, just in case: >> http://cgdb.github.io/images/screenshot_debugging.png > > > Alternatively, feel free to advise any sufficient debugging experience with > oe-core. I will happily switch to any opportunities that reach this level. > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
