[yocto] [meta-rockchip][PATCH 2/7] machine: Add machine file for the rk3288 linux Boards

[Khem Raj]

On 1/27/17 11:41 AM, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Romain Perier <romain.perier at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Could you:
>> - Make one patch per new machine file and not one patch for all new added
>> machine
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Are all of these machines actual devices? The evb one doesn't sound real.
> 
> Are all of these machines released and available for purchase? I've
> heard of the tinkerboard (although I can't seem to find one I can
> actually buy) but I haven't heard of the fennec.
> 
>> - Add a clear @DESCRIPTION for each board, see an example here:
>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-rockchip/tree/conf/machine/firefly-rk3288.conf
>> - Write a clear and an understandable commit message for your new patches
>>
>> @Trevor: What do you think about this rk-linux.inc ? I don't like this,
>> either its name and what it contains.
> 
> First off, I think it's really great to see people contributing to
> meta-rockchip! :-)
> 
> This entire set of patches seems to be adding "official" support for
> the rockchip devices; in other words, these recipes will help you to
> create builds that use the official rockchip sources. That is great.
> But I think a good BSP gives a user all the possibilities but then
> leaves the final decision up to them.
> 
> So I agree with Romain, I think the name could use more work. It would
> be nice if this set of patches included something in the name that let
> the user know these build from official sources. Then the user could
> decide whether they want to use the official rockchip sources, or
> whether they want to build from upstream. So I'm not opposed to the
> idea of adding recipes for official sources, I'd like like to see them
> added in a way that leaves the decision with the user.

Usually convention is <packagename>-mainline.bb in some BSP layer. In
somecases community layers are maintained in repo of their own.

> 
> 
> 
>> That's it for now.
>> Thanks for your patches
> 
> +1 :-)
>