On 02/16/2012 03:25 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
The point is that the tree is local to your machine, but it doesn't
have to be. You may only have push, not direct commit access. It's
really not asking for anything that isn't already common practice.
Hmm, I'm not at all a git expert, but I thought common practice was to
clone the upstream git tree, then create local branches that track the
upstream ones. I've never seen any directions say "first create a bare
clone, then clone that again, then create local branches."
I'm just trying to test a small kernel/meta patch, and the poorly
documented list of setup requirements is growing longer and longer. All
this stuff may be good practice for a more complicated scenario, but so
far it seems like enormous overkill for my use case...
So why are you trying to use the technique ? Maybe the answer is that the
docs made it sound like this was the best/right way .. and that's a
problem in itself.
The docs don't cover "how do I add a kernel patch?" at all, AFAICS.
... oh wow, now I see
http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/dev-manual/dev-manual.html.
This actually does talk about bare clones.
http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/kernel-manual/kernel-manual.html,
which is what I had been reading, does not.
If you do have a single patch, toss it on the end of the SRC_URI and
everything just works like any other package.
The reason I'm even bothering is to try to be a good person. I could
have stuck this in a private collection 2 days ago... but I figured this
is going to bite plenty of other people, so I should try to submit a
patch that would fix it for everybody. I could tell the kernel
configuration system is complicated, but I really didn't expect this
many barriers.
Hollis Blanchard
Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
