[yocto] kernel-devsrc used to be full source - not the case since thud

[Andrei Gherzan]

On 23/05/2019 15.32, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 9:56 AM Andrei Gherzan <andrei at gherzan.ro
> <mailto:andrei at gherzan.ro>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     This might have been discussed before. I couldn't find a relevant
>     thread, but if it is so, just link me to it.
>
>     Since thud, more specific since
>
>     commit 9af0f1a46bbb6ad9ee8b35957251f4aa826b023f
>     Author: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com
>     <mailto:bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>>
>     Date:   Sat Aug 18 22:50:44 2018 -0400
>         kernel-devsrc: restructure for out of tree (and on target)
>     module builds
>
>     ... we switched from a recipe that was deploying the entire source
>     code
>     to one that provides mainly the kernel headers (but not only). This
>     change broke people expectations of this recipe while the
>     description is
>     also confusing: "Development source linux kernel. When built, this
>     recipe packages the \source of the preferred virtual/kernel
>     provider and
>     makes it available for full kernel \development or external module
>     builds".
>
>     If size is not a problem (which can be the case when you compile on a
>     builder for example and deploy only a OOT kernel module through other
>     means), the full kernel source was a painless experience where
>     things like
>
>     commit a9471601fedd1f5087304eaa5fd39b98ae220313
>     Author: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com
>     <mailto:bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>>
>     Date:   Thu Aug 30 09:45:41 2018 -0400
>         kernel-devsrc: fix arm/arm64 target module build
>
>     ... would not appear. I understand the size impact on target and for
>     those cases, continuously maintaining this recipe with new
>     files/resources needed from the kernel, makes sense. So my proposal is
>     to have two recipes, for example kernel-devsrc and kernel-fullsrc
>     (kernel-src etc.) so people can choose what they need/want
>     deploying/using. Or even have another devsrc provider. I'm open to any
>     implementation detail. I'd just want to have an option for a full
>     kernel
>     source recipe.
>
>
> This is already planned, and hidden in bugzilla somewhere. I'll have
> some new kernel packaging
> options available for the fall release.
Nice to hear that. Can you share more details on that because we plan to
implement it for BalenaOS and would be a waste to redo what you already
have or do it in different ways and reset afterwards.

-- 
Andrei Gherzan
gpg: rsa4096/D4D94F67AD0E9640 | t: @agherzan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/attachments/20190523/4b0dd3a3/attachment.html>