[yocto] kernel-devsrc used to be full source - not the case since thud

[Andrei Gherzan]

Hello,

This might have been discussed before. I couldn't find a relevant
thread, but if it is so, just link me to it.

Since thud, more specific since

commit 9af0f1a46bbb6ad9ee8b35957251f4aa826b023f
Author: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>
Date:   Sat Aug 18 22:50:44 2018 -0400
    kernel-devsrc: restructure for out of tree (and on target) module builds

... we switched from a recipe that was deploying the entire source code
to one that provides mainly the kernel headers (but not only). This
change broke people expectations of this recipe while the description is
also confusing: "Development source linux kernel. When built, this
recipe packages the \source of the preferred virtual/kernel provider and
makes it available for full kernel \development or external module builds".

If size is not a problem (which can be the case when you compile on a
builder for example and deploy only a OOT kernel module through other
means), the full kernel source was a painless experience where things like

commit a9471601fedd1f5087304eaa5fd39b98ae220313
Author: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com>
Date:   Thu Aug 30 09:45:41 2018 -0400
    kernel-devsrc: fix arm/arm64 target module build

... would not appear. I understand the size impact on target and for
those cases, continuously maintaining this recipe with new
files/resources needed from the kernel, makes sense. So my proposal is
to have two recipes, for example kernel-devsrc and kernel-fullsrc
(kernel-src etc.) so people can choose what they need/want
deploying/using. Or even have another devsrc provider. I'm open to any
implementation detail. I'd just want to have an option for a full kernel
source recipe.

Regards,

-- 
Andrei Gherzan
gpg: rsa4096/D4D94F67AD0E9640 | t: @agherzan