Hi Marcin, Richard & OE crew, At ELC-E, we discussed how we could improve the collaboration between the cross build systems out there. Although there are big differences in what kind of tools people use, there is one thing that all cross build systems have in common: patches for upstream packets.
What people usually do when starting a new packet which doesn't build out of the box is looking around if oe, buildroot, ptxdist, t2, ... has a patch, copy it, or, if not, invest more or less time to fix (or hack around) the upstream issue. Then patches go into the build systems and bit rot there :-) I'm wondering if there is interest in more collaboration wrt. bringing cross development paches upstream; one effort we started after FOSDEM this year is the send-patches.org project, mainly by creating the [email protected] mailing list. However, I suppose we should think about what we could do to increase the activities. The main concern of the ptxdist maintainers with simply taking patches from other build systems is patch quality; our rules are: - patches have to be in the canonical patch format, as known from linux - proper Signed-off-by: lines - patches should be made with upstream in mind, i.e. "correct" fixes instead of quick hacks; if we really need hacks, they should be clearly marked as "not for upstream". - modify autotool files separately from their autogenerated files What do you think? Should we try to create a new patch stack which follows these rules, in order to lower the ammount of duplicate work? At least for us, this would be very interesting. Cheers, Robert (ptxdist team) -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
