Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] u-boot: Add RPROVIDES bootloader

[Otavio Salvador]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Paul Eggleton
 wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 17:45:40 Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Paul Eggleton
>>
>>  wrote:
>> > On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:59:52 Fabio Berton wrote:
>> >> This change allow to install u-boot in /boot partition using
>> >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS variable e.g.:
>> >>
>> >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "bootloader"
>> >>
>> >> This is usefull when system has only one partition and u-boot,
>> >> kernel and device tree need to be installed in /boot.
>> >
>> > If the intention is that other packages also have "bootloader" in
>> > RPROVIDES, I thought that these kinds of "virtual provides" weren't
>> > supported well by all of the package managers. (We might get away with it
>> > here since they probably will all be in their own separate
>> > machine-specific feeds, though).
>>
>> The point in having the bootloader is because different bootloaders
>> may provide the functionality for the board. This is especially keen
>> for commercial distributions where a U-Boot fork may include fixes and
>> this should be used on top of the BSP default and without many changes
>> on the layer.
>>
>> As you pointed out, the U-Boot usually has a single provider as it is
>> a MACHINE_ARCH package. I think it is a safe addition, isn't it?
>
> If we can guarantee that there will only be one runtime provider of
> "bootloader", then I would assume so, yes.
>
> One question - at OEDEM (based on the minutes, I wasn't there) the
> proliferation of u-boot recipes across BSPs was discussed and there was at
> least a desire to try to move to a single recipe where practically possible.
> Do you have any opinions on that? I bring it up because if there was only
> "u-boot" presumably we wouldn't need the "bootloader" RPROVIDES at all.

I agree and I think this should be a continuous goal for the entire
project and Yocto Project members, however, this is unlikely to happen
as internal BSPs and custom boards will always keep forked versions
around.

Even though having a single recipe is not going to happen, reducing
the fragmentation is very possible and desirable. We did some of work
on meta-freescale on this direction making many board to use
u-boot-fslc as provider. Some vendors moved to it while others keep
using their forks.

-- 
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.brhttp://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] u-boot: Add RPROVIDES bootloader

[Paul Eggleton]

On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 17:45:40 Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Paul Eggleton
> 
>  wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:59:52 Fabio Berton wrote:
> >> This change allow to install u-boot in /boot partition using
> >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS variable e.g.:
> >> 
> >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "bootloader"
> >> 
> >> This is usefull when system has only one partition and u-boot,
> >> kernel and device tree need to be installed in /boot.
> > 
> > If the intention is that other packages also have "bootloader" in
> > RPROVIDES, I thought that these kinds of "virtual provides" weren't
> > supported well by all of the package managers. (We might get away with it
> > here since they probably will all be in their own separate
> > machine-specific feeds, though).
>
> The point in having the bootloader is because different bootloaders
> may provide the functionality for the board. This is especially keen
> for commercial distributions where a U-Boot fork may include fixes and
> this should be used on top of the BSP default and without many changes
> on the layer.
> 
> As you pointed out, the U-Boot usually has a single provider as it is
> a MACHINE_ARCH package. I think it is a safe addition, isn't it?

If we can guarantee that there will only be one runtime provider of 
"bootloader", then I would assume so, yes.

One question - at OEDEM (based on the minutes, I wasn't there) the 
proliferation of u-boot recipes across BSPs was discussed and there was at 
least a desire to try to move to a single recipe where practically possible. 
Do you have any opinions on that? I bring it up because if there was only 
"u-boot" presumably we wouldn't need the "bootloader" RPROVIDES at all.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] u-boot: Add RPROVIDES bootloader

[Otavio Salvador]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Paul Eggleton
 wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:59:52 Fabio Berton wrote:
>> This change allow to install u-boot in /boot partition using
>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS variable e.g.:
>>
>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "bootloader"
>>
>> This is usefull when system has only one partition and u-boot,
>> kernel and device tree need to be installed in /boot.
>
> If the intention is that other packages also have "bootloader" in RPROVIDES, I
> thought that these kinds of "virtual provides" weren't supported well by all
> of the package managers. (We might get away with it here since they probably
> will all be in their own separate machine-specific feeds, though).

The point in having the bootloader is because different bootloaders
may provide the functionality for the board. This is especially keen
for commercial distributions where a U-Boot fork may include fixes and
this should be used on top of the BSP default and without many changes
on the layer.

As you pointed out, the U-Boot usually has a single provider as it is
a MACHINE_ARCH package. I think it is a safe addition, isn't it?

-- 
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.brhttp://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] u-boot: Add RPROVIDES bootloader

[Paul Eggleton]

Hi Fabio,

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:59:52 Fabio Berton wrote:
> This change allow to install u-boot in /boot partition using
> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS variable e.g.:
> 
> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "bootloader"
> 
> This is usefull when system has only one partition and u-boot,
> kernel and device tree need to be installed in /boot.

If the intention is that other packages also have "bootloader" in RPROVIDES, I 
thought that these kinds of "virtual provides" weren't supported well by all 
of the package managers. (We might get away with it here since they probably 
will all be in their own separate machine-specific feeds, though).

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] u-boot: Add RPROVIDES bootloader

[Fabio Berton]

Use MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "u-boot" without apply any patch?

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Burton, Ross  wrote:

>
> On 2 December 2016 at 13:59, Fabio Berton 
> wrote:
>
>> This change allow to install u-boot in /boot partition using
>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS variable e.g.:
>>
>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "bootloader"
>>
>> This is usefull when system has only one partition and u-boot,
>> kernel and device tree need to be installed in /boot.
>>
>
> What does this give you over just MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS +=
> "u-boot"?
>
> Ross
>
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] u-boot: Add RPROVIDES bootloader

[Burton, Ross]

On 2 December 2016 at 13:59, Fabio Berton 
wrote:

> This change allow to install u-boot in /boot partition using
> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS variable e.g.:
>
> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS += "bootloader"
>
> This is usefull when system has only one partition and u-boot,
> kernel and device tree need to be installed in /boot.
>

What does this give you over just MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS +=
"u-boot"?

Ross
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core