[yocto] yocto beagleboard.conf -- should it not go away?

[Richard Purdie]

On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 10:20 -0400, William Mills wrote:
> On 09/04/2012 07:23 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 09/04/2012 01:25 PM, William Mills wrote:
> >
> >> Darren: Is it true you can't get @ the Intel BSP's w/o also getting the
> >> poky distro defs?  That does seem to mixing things a bit.  (I am not
> >> claiming meta-ti is clean yet but I want to understand the Intel examples.)
> >>
> >
> > It isn't something we test as part of the QA that we perform. I mostly
> > expect people building meta-intel to be building with meta-yocto
> > (although I wouldn't take a hard line on requiring it). That said, I
> > removed meta-yocto from a meta-intel/meta-fri2 build and removed
> > DISTRO=poky from my local.conf and successfully built and booted a
> > core-image-minimal build on an FRI2 this afternoon without any changes.
> >
> 
> Thanks!  My confidence is restored.
> 
> As long as including meta-yocto does not interfere with other BSPs or 
> distros etc then there should be no harm in your assumption.
> 
> I would be interested to know what Mentor Graphics and Wind River do on 
> their products.  Do they include meta-yocto? (YP is not all about 
> comercial OS support but I know these orginatations have done the due 
> diligence on layer compatibility for a non-poky distro.)

Commercial OS support usually involves some of your own policy so
meta-yocto is interesting as an example to them but they'd probably only
use it as inspiration to write their own. That was always expected and
meta-yocto is extremely thin deliberately.

Having said that, what meta-yocto was doing was wrong, it wasn't
intentional, the implications not fully realised and is hopefully now
fixed with the split :).

Cheers,

Richard