[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH] qt5: add mx5 and mx6 support

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com> wrote:

> Le Fri, 31 May 2013 12:04:11 -0300,
> Otavio Salvador <otavio at ossystems.com.br> a écrit :
>
> > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Le Fri, 31 May 2013 12:00:08 -0300,
> > > Otavio Salvador <otavio at ossystems.com.br> a écrit :
> > >
> > > > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Le Fri, 31 May 2013 10:18:44 -0300,
> > > > > Otavio Salvador <otavio at ossystems.com.br> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > - this allow to build qt5 with OpenGL ES support for i.MX5 and
> > > i.MX6
> > > > > > > - tested on i.MX51, i.MX53 and i.MX6Q
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase/mx5/qeglfshooks_imx5.cpp |  105
> > > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > >  recipes-qt/qt5/qtbase_5.0.2.bbappend           |   68
> > > +++++++++++++++
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thinking more about it, I think we should put these inside a
> meta-qt5
> > > > > > directory so we know what will be 'included'. Otherwse we may
> need to
> > > > > pick
> > > > > > every file depending on each layer and it might be difficult to
> > > > > understand
> > > > > > what is in use and what is not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > please apply as is and create a patch on top of it to achieve the
> > > > > organization you prefer.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No reason to apply one patch which we know that needs rework.
> > > >
> > > > Do you agree with my argument?
> > > >
> > > no ;-)
> > >
> >
> > Well; it would be easier if you could explain why. Do you mind to
> elaborate
> > it a little more?
> >
> if the argument is "No reason to apply one patch which we know that
> needs rework" :
> Changing the organization of the bbappend is not just a mater of editing
> the patch in a few minutes, it also means testing with and without
> meta-qt5 and that's very long (and I already did that for v1 when we
> discussed that initially).
> 2 days ago you told me that the RFC was fine, now you tell me that
> needs rework and as I don't have immediate time to rework it so if you
> want to change the organization or use Chris' way to add layers (which
> is very elegant) either create a patch to rework this one or rework the
> patch before applying or drop it for the moment and I may work again
> on that later (and in that case, please reply with the organization
> you want so that the work is done only one time).
>

I asked you to send it as proper patch for review. I didn't noticed you
have put the bbappend in same level as the other so when I noticed it I
commented.


> if the argument is "it might be difficult to understand what is in use
> and what is not" :
> as soon as you have automatic addition of sublayers you fall in a case
> where it's not easy to understand what is in use or not whatever is
> your directory organization.
>

I'd put it as:

recipes-...
meta-qt5/recipes-qt/qt5/...

Or as Chris suggested:

recipes-...
qt5-layer/recipes-qt/qt5

Both ways looks good for me.

I will mark them as 'Changes requested' in patchwork.

Regards,


-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-freescale/attachments/20130531/9342759d/attachment.html>