From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6617812835611181056 X-Received: by 2002:a1c:968b:: with SMTP id y133-v6mr428584wmd.12.1541769985176; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 05:26:25 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: isar-users@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a1c:b6c1:: with SMTP id g184-v6ls379352wmf.9.canary-gmail; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 05:26:24 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eBwhgYfcEcfp/8vCoEVTQAvGgxyeiZEUyubCgjTIlruqlrHNW87hJxIDZTn3JICO5sFqrR X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c013:: with SMTP id c19-v6mr424338wmb.23.1541769984679; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 05:26:24 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1541769984; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mR0+z5hB8JoeDS9AZ0/JMgPCAbiW7TyzNI6Xf/qMCyF2wL+pkzrILw0m5f5gSfsRTW sZP2xAvUGCaUxu8oPpQiGnRTFphVBzDwe8WdqGgTLWfueatuEM29KZeQnKd2pXy1zPd5 xgbDDUh4DgvDwwyCNZ8SuDdxSEGsgMaCH/rwclMwyxqKt++r10aovXxwLN7f+4zOpw9I WIdlyCJwmniN2zIVCTmCUkFtZ4gWl1dsRinn7F5L/S/NSFLnjWrr/ERtpdsCR7R++S6m jvAefxMm/bwqxZzvnoB7NDsw647Nw31VoiolBfifLdpqyLLnmyFR6y1nmdTrIWsZjiz3 JZmQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:to:from:date; bh=J7v+Z4tPI+gqzVleXNtQn3eYIp7im3TJAMsb84tY6AM=; b=gVvd628NMz0yDwtVrTS7cl/CVskdCTfvSro4pIJxHQFxW/GHwyphxOwiIJra3db3Z/ 7zO25k6caqn2iR7ogB/nVRFMP3ULxJdUdBM9D9Kxtl9/d4g55vO1t/rRkUen7MB6ZjxR vJzMqj0B2FsQv9PWizPyjy23wBqWQqlw523DbXYN7U6MnZOUCzRBIcnOVEuhoda13ywC 6/62jI5aDYPpt792cLa7B/9HQ6BPmEyrsppMW3p/i9S2X3+S9HdIQlSAVIDztlyxQ3xO Q2OIQUjr7yAJrOFDNxjOdom4bwtrXBoJk+pJYvGp3cYOQjT+pz7Ng7XqIV50oFuFNbiK dIeg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Return-Path: Received: from aqmola.ilbers.de (aqmola.ilbers.de. [85.214.62.211]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l4-v6si44852wrb.4.2018.11.09.05.26.24 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Nov 2018 05:26:24 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) client-ip=85.214.62.211; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Received: from yssyq.m.ilbers.de (host-80-81-17-52.static.customer.m-online.net [80.81.17.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by aqmola.ilbers.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id wA9DQMOg016132 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:26:23 +0100 Received: from yssyq.m.ilbers.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yssyq.m.ilbers.de (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-8) with ESMTPS id wA9DQLD2028527 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:26:21 +0100 Received: (from ibr@localhost) by yssyq.m.ilbers.de (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id wA9DQLKU028526 for isar-users@googlegroups.com; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:26:21 +0100 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:26:21 +0100 From: Baurzhan Ismagulov To: isar-users Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] introduce isar-image class Message-ID: <20181109132621.GC17039@yssyq.m.ilbers.de> Mail-Followup-To: isar-users References: <20181030134154.7adc8bf9@md1pvb1c.ad001.siemens.net> <20181031061025.28840-1-Cedric_Hombourger@mentor.com> <57847f7a-9b85-65ef-b11e-8952bf532e0f@siemens.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-TUID: 3BcgPk9zXeOf On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:51:57PM -0700, chombourger@gmail.com wrote: > That's great to know, I was wondering if we had some guidelines on what > should go to meta vs meta-isar meta is the generic one ("Isar itself") and meta-isar is a demo one that may be used as a template for your product. > We will probably need to document this somewhere and introduce some > mechanisms to have our CI jobs check if isar/meta is buildable without > isar/meta-isar That would be a good litmus test for meta vs. meta-isar decisions. Currently, we don't have an image in meta. > In the short term, I can amend the patch series to move the class to > isar/meta If isar-image.bbclass would help creating product images, it's indeed worth having in meta. > I believe we could also place isar-image-base there but leave > isar-image-debug in isar/meta-isar since the definition of a debug image we > have there appears to be just an example Originally, isar-image-base was also just an example reusable by copy-pasting. If isar-image.bbclass goes to meta and isar-image-base.bb becomes a two-liner, it would make sense to include the latter in meta as well. That would allow CI testing of meta alone. I'd keep isar-image-debug.bb alongside isar-image-base.bb, separating those would be unhandy. Regarding machine support, one approach could be supporting all Debian QEMU targets in meta, leaving the rest in meta-isar. I'm in favor of adding new boards to meta-isar, since people end up implementing them in their own repos. In the long term, if meta-isar grows, we could consider moving it into a separate repo and renaming e.g. meta -> meta-isar, meta-isar -> meta-isar-demo if that is more intuitive. With kind regards, Baurzhan.