Re: [leaf-devel] andrew/linux-headers - mods
07.01.2014 19:28, KP Kirchdörfer пишет: > Hi Andrew; > > Am Montag, 6. Januar 2014, 19:44:35 schrieb Andrew: >> Hi all. >> >> At least I've got an idea how to easily maintain different targets with >> different kernels, and how to simplify config/patches/etc storing with >> minimum modifications of logic. > Nice coincidence - I've worked towards a unified kernel for rpi, while you'll > try to manage diffenrent kernel for the architectures :) > > But I do see, the benefits. > > And like you, I've started to use the make/toolchain/*mk files to tweak > different settings for architectures myself. Looks like those files becomes > more > important - they are not as "static" as they have been. > > Needs to be clarified in the docs/wiki. Unified kernel is good (esp. 3.10 branch - which has some features like removed route cache, which can add additional performance on powerful routers), but in any case we can in future use different kernels for different archs - and usage of different kernels now is easier. Also now we can use different basic kernel configs for different archs to minimize patches. >> I've moved kernel version into make/toolchain/.mk, and added >> __TOOLCHAIN__, __KVER__ and __KBRANCH__ macro handlind to source >> filename and dir into buildtool.cfg section. So, specifying >> different kernel versions into make/toolchain/.mk we can >> maintain targets with different kernels. Also this eliminates userland >> dependency from kernel (except some packages with kernel modules). >> >> Also I think that it'll be good to add macro item to specify >> a lot of files in single record (for ex., for kernel sub-arch patches), >> but it seems that it'll require more significant changes into buildenv. >> >> It seems like all is working; I'll try to rebuild tree. > And did it work? Yes. > How far are we away from rebuilding kernel and userland without touching the > toolchain? This would save a lot time testing stuff. > > kp Now it can be rebuilt separately. Just for simplier usage, we should add separate cleanup for toolchain, kernel and userland. Or even move toolchain to separate buildtool target... Merge with master should be also almost trivial (I merged it, there are some trivial merge conflicts but can't now check - I have hw troubles with root drive again, I'll fix it in some days). -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [leaf-devel] andrew/linux-headers - mods
Hi Andrew; Am Montag, 6. Januar 2014, 19:44:35 schrieb Andrew: > Hi all. > > At least I've got an idea how to easily maintain different targets with > different kernels, and how to simplify config/patches/etc storing with > minimum modifications of logic. Nice coincidence - I've worked towards a unified kernel for rpi, while you'll try to manage diffenrent kernel for the architectures :) But I do see, the benefits. And like you, I've started to use the make/toolchain/*mk files to tweak different settings for architectures myself. Looks like those files becomes more important - they are not as "static" as they have been. Needs to be clarified in the docs/wiki. > I've moved kernel version into make/toolchain/.mk, and added > __TOOLCHAIN__, __KVER__ and __KBRANCH__ macro handlind to source > filename and dir into buildtool.cfg section. So, specifying > different kernel versions into make/toolchain/.mk we can > maintain targets with different kernels. Also this eliminates userland > dependency from kernel (except some packages with kernel modules). > > Also I think that it'll be good to add macro item to specify > a lot of files in single record (for ex., for kernel sub-arch patches), > but it seems that it'll require more significant changes into buildenv. > > It seems like all is working; I'll try to rebuild tree. And did it work? How far are we away from rebuilding kernel and userland without touching the toolchain? This would save a lot time testing stuff. kp -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [leaf-devel] start with branch renaming/moving
Am Dienstag, 7. Januar 2014, 09:24:18 schrieb Yves Blusseau: > Le 6 janv. 2014 à 19:09, KP Kirchdörfer a écrit : > > Locally I do have maint-4.x, how to proceed? > > > >>> btw: how can we fix the wrong rename/move of maint to maint-4.x? > >> > >> Yes easy :D > >> remove local and remote branches with the commands: > >> git checkout master > >> git branch -d maint-4.x > >> git push origin :maint-4.x > > > > Really? master is at 5.0. What I'm looking for is to have move back > > maint-4.x to maint, then do it right to move maint to maint-4x and from > > then to create a new maint from master. > > Yes you need to delete maint-4.x locally and remotely then « create » a new > maint and a new master. > > If you think it’s obscur for you i can do it. I prefer you do, that's too obscur for me :) thx a lot kp -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [leaf-devel] start with branch renaming/moving
Le 6 janv. 2014 à 19:09, KP Kirchdörfer a écrit : > Locally I do have maint-4.x, how to proceed? > >>> btw: how can we fix the wrong rename/move of maint to maint-4.x? >> >> Yes easy :D >> remove local and remote branches with the commands: >> git checkout master >> git branch -d maint-4.x >> git push origin :maint-4.x > > Really? master is at 5.0. What I'm looking for is to have move back maint-4.x > to maint, then do it right to move maint to maint-4x and from then to create > a > new maint from master. > Yes you need to delete maint-4.x locally and remotely then « create » a new maint and a new master. If you think it’s obscur for you i can do it. Regards, Yves -- Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
