[yocto] [PATCH] bsp-guide: replace meta-intel with meta-xilinx as container layer

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Thu, 2 May 2019, Scott Rifenbark wrote:

> Great, thanks!
>
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 11:21 AM akuster <akuster at mvista.com> wrote:
>
>
>       On 5/2/19 10:45 AM, Scott Rifenbark wrote:
>       The term "Container Layer" was put in the ref-manual by me to describe a
>       "meta-*" layer that had other "meta-*" layers (see
>       https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.7/ref-manual/ref-manual.html#term-container-layer
>       and the term "Container Layer").  Maybe this was never a good term?  I don't
>       know.  Nobody has said anything about that term for many releases. 
>
> The problem Robert points out needs to be fixed in the BSP manual as "meta-intel" is
> not longer qualifying by my definition.  I can fix that. 
>
> Is "Container Layer" ok as I have defined it?
>
> in those terms above, yes its fine.

  the more i think about it, the more i'm nervous about the phrase
"container layer", as it suggests a "layer" of some kind in the
context of OE. the one distinction i think worth making is that a "BSP
layer" is a layer expressly designed to support identified target
systems (eg., meta-xilinx-bsp), while a non-BSP layer simply packages
functionality (recipes, classes) -- a good example is
meta-virtualization.

  in either case, the trivial property of an OE layer is something
that can be specified in a bblayers.conf file. so i'm not sure *how*
you would describe, for example, meta-openembedded.

  i'm sure i'm overthinking this.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                         http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================