On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Burton, Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 17 March 2016 at 17:19, Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> -DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILL = "pulseaudio sysvinit bluez5
>> gobject-introspection-data"
>> -MACHINE_FEATURES_BACKFILL = "rtc gobject-introspection-data"
>> +DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILL = "pulseaudio sysvinit bluez5"
>> +MACHINE_FEATURES_BACKFILL = "rtc"
>
> So every BSP (apart from the qemu ones) would need to add the feature to
> MACHINE_FEATURES?
>
> Maybe we should remove from DISTRO backfill but keep backfilling for MACHINE
> features?

Or don't control via a MACHINE feature at all (which would also solve
the package PACKAGE_ARCH issue) ?

Each CPU tuning file would then instead need to somehow express "this
tuning target creates binaries which can / can't be run with qemu",
but maybe that's an improvement too - isn't it better to define and
maintain that information centrally in files controlled by oe-core
rather than leave it up to BSPs to get right?

> Ross
-- 
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to