On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:51 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Btw. Is this yocto-kernel specifics, or is it relatively new in oe? I worked > quite a bit in oe about a year ago, and we never used such a file then. But > this was not a derivative of yocto-kernel.
It's been around since yocto 0.9, in one form or another, with tweaks to make things more "under the covers" as time progresses. It is inherent to kernel's that inherit kernel-yocto, which adds functionality around config fragments and patch management, etc. If I my latest rounds of tweaks would have been complete, it would have been nicely hidden here as well :) It wouldn't hurt other kernels, it would just be ignored. Bruce > > On 11. aug. 2013, at 07:12, Bruce Ashfield <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 13-08-08 8:38 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>> On 13-08-08 02:04 AM, Martin Ertsaas wrote: >>>> On 08/07/13 19:23, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>>> On 13-08-07 12:31 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>> Bruce, have you had the opportunity to look at this yet? >>>>> >>>>> I was about to email on this. I was out of the office last week, but >>>>> was just starting on this last night. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Bruce >>>> Great. Thanks for the help btw. It is greatly appreciated. I'm kind of >>>> stuck on what I have done wrong on this one. >>> >>> Understood. I'm bumping this up to my list and have started a test build. >> >> I've sorted this out. You didn't do anything wrong, outside of not >> defining a BSP description for the board you are building. >> >> I've had a patch queued for 1.5 that would have detected this mismatch >> and adapted, but that change is held up on the 3.10 kernel and some >> other changes .. but I digress. >> >> This also should have been in the docs, since it is what the yocto-bsp >> tool generates for new BSPs. But it's probably not obvious enough, and >> with my pending patches, that should be ok .. but I digress again. >> >> What basically happened is that the atom-pc BSP description was picked >> to match your pandaboard build. That's why you see the different architecture >> and what looks like an ignored defconfig. The tools will shortly >> generate you a skeleton config, but for now, you need to define your >> own that will be found and used. >> >> I've attached a patch that does just that, and when I configured, >> everything was applied properly. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bruce >> >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>>> >>>> - Martin >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> yocto mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto >> >> <0001-pandaboard-add-BSP-description.patch> > _______________________________________________ > yocto mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end" _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
