[linux-yocto] LTSI for 3.10 - Standard Practice

[Hart, Darren]

On 2/11/14, 16:04, "Bruce Ashfield" <bruce.ashfield at gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hart, Darren <darren.hart at intel.com>
>wrote:
>> Bruce,
>>
>> While looking to update the MinnowBoard dora BSP I noticed that the
>>minnow
>> platform drivers Greg added to LTSI were not in standard/ltsi. Did you
>> drop those in favor of the minnow-io feature?
>
>standard/ltsi is applied on top of the standard branch contents, and since
>we already had the minnow io features in there, I checked the patches
>and went with the ones already in the standard branch.

Ah, but I'm talking about minnow-io, which is not in the standard branch,
it exists only in features/minnow-io (and greg's LTSI, but not
standard/ltsi).

>
>>
>> I see the standard/base and standard/ltsi branches are at the same
>>commit
>> ID. What is the expected usage here? If you want LTSI, are you expected
>>to
>> specify standard/ltsi? Or is that just a staging branch, and everything
>> can be assumed to have the contents of LTSI? (The latter was my
>> expectation, but I wanted to be sure).
>
>All branches have LTSI contained with them, so you can use any branch
>in the tree and be assured that you have LTSI + anything extra on the
>branch, but definitely an exact superset of LTSI.
>
>So yep, you have it right, standard/ltsi is just where I staged the LTSI
>integration, and where I'll merge any updates to it.

Ack, thanks.

-- 
Darren Hart
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
Intel Open Source Technology Center