[meta-ti] [RFC] u-boot recipe naming

[Philip Balister]

On 01/20/2012 07:41 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We currently have a problem with other layers including their own version of u-boot_2011.12.bb which confuses bitbake. To avoid such hassle in the future I'm going to propose using the kernel naming scheme for u-boot recipes as well:
> 
> u-boot-denx_2011.12.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de master + patches
> u-boot-ti_git.bb -> u-boot from git.denx.de ti branch + patches
> u-boot-psp-<soc>_git.bb -> u-boot from psp tree for $SoC + patches e.g. u-boot-psp-am18x_git.bb

Since I kind of started the problem, some background....

I'm very nervous using a shared u-boot recipe to ship to customers,
since there always seems to be some regression creeping in as other
people fix things for their hardware (the recent L2 cache turn off for
omap3 to fix omap4 booting comes to mind).

So I want to control my u-boot with an iron fist!

But, I tried to be lazy and not pollute the u-boot package namespace by
calling the recipe u-boot-usrp-e1xx. Apparently this did not work so well :)

Philip

> 
> This should avoid filename based conflicts between layers and make it clearer which tree the recipe will be building.
> 
> Thoughts/flames/opinions?
> 
> regards,
> 
> Koen