On 06/13/2012 01:55 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On 12-06-13 04:52 PM, Ross Burton wrote: >> On Wednesday, 13 June 2012 at 21:47, Darren Hart wrote: >>> Seems reasonable to me. We should probably have 32b and 64b of this >>> machine as well. >> >> And x32… :) > > From the kernel point of view, these are just configuration extensions > to a base, which is where this discussion started (the kernel, I'm > excluding userspace on purpose). So this should be one machine with > these as overlays, not three different machines.
I would have thought the three different architectures would have called for three different machines. How would this work from the KMACHINE meta-data perspective? -- Darren > > Cheers, > > Bruce > >> >> Ross >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> yocto mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto > -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center Yocto Project - Linux Kernel _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
