[meta-ti] question on meta-ti for yocto

[Koen Kooi]

Op 21 mrt. 2012, om 23:10 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven:

> On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 17:45 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>> That's not true. There are no hard dependencies on meta-angstrom any more. And 
>> meta-oe is only needed to supply gcc-4.5 for now, until all the issues are 
>> ironed out.
>> 
>> I've been making numerous builds past few weeks with different combination of 
>> layers and besides few bugs I need to fix for the distro-less configuration, 
>> was quite successful getting meta-ti work with oe-core WITHOUT meta-angstrom!
>> 
>> There are some systemd dependencies, but they are no longer hard ones. There 
>> was discussion about moving beagle payload stuff off of meta-ti. But it should 
>> no longer break things.
> 
> I've been going by the information I see and the contents of the meta-ti
> README. Reading the above it looks like much progress is being made,
> things are changing and I really do appreciate that happening!
> 
>>> The amount of confusion this is causing users is immense as we see from
>>> new users and experienced ones alike. Whilst I know people have nodded
>>> and agreed they're going to fix it, time goes on and we don't seem to
>>> make much progress.
>>> 
>>> The biggest confusion factor out there at the moment is meta-ti, not
>>> poky and I'd like to ask politely for people to get their act together.
>> 
>> See above, the work is being done. The first wave of people who complained 
>> about those dependencies are now building their images. There are still 
>> confused people, but we'll clear the message once all obstacles are resolved.
> 
> Great, thanks!
> 
>> Richard, Koen, please take your word-fight and name-calling offline! It's not 
>> a proper place here. Thank you.
> 
> Well said and I agree with you! :)
> 
> The trouble is Koen keeps doing this and nobody in general replies. The
> lack of a reply can be seen as to condone what was said and its
> certainly leading to people getting more confused. I think a response
> was appropriate.
> 
> I also do not mean to undermine the progress being made on meta-ti. I
> hadn't heard much for a while but it looks like things are moving
> forward and that is great to see.

And for the record, I have been the *only* one so far sending patches to break that dependency and I don't even work for TI anymore!

http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/commit/?id=0d4418518a05b8f47697aa69a18a832d90eb8d87
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/commit/?id=17600a532e574ec9e09a18a9cb6197b73331c3df
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/commit/?id=e31722adc42ef202ae273571ce19a7ac304e5eb6

regards,

Koen