<richard.purdie@...> wrote: Thank you very much Martin and Richard. Cheers A.A.

I forgot to mention: https://github.com/ros/meta-ros/pull/895 https://github.com/ros/meta-ros-webos/pull/18 and today added draft PR for meta-clang as

I have continued to work on this and I now think we're as ready as we'll ever be with the core. I have: * submitted a section for the migration guide documenting the conversion process * increased

Yesterday I've spent some time migrating the layers I sometimes use. It's definitely not perfect, but it's useful as a starting point (I was even able to build an image with these changes). I've sent

Hi Marco, I agree it is important this is documented. I've sent a patch to the manuals  to add a section to the 3.4 migration guide: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/docs/message/1589 Does that

Sooner the better is my view... Thanks for all of this, I know it's going to make things better longer term no matter when it switches over to the new format. (Also making the tune-XXX a first class

Hi Richard, thank you for your precious work. IMHO it is important to produce a clear documentation about the new features maybe providing some practical cases. Just my 2 cents, Cheers, -- Marco

Em qua., 28 de jul. de 2021 às 12:43, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@...> escreveu: I believe your plan is good and given the new layers will work down to dunfell I see no big

Hi All, I've spent quite a bit of time seeing how to progress things. I now have a script which can convert layers and seems to have reasonable success on OE-Core, bitbake, yocto-docs, meta-yocto,

Not necessarily. Providing latest LTS kernels for Dunfell also seems very specific. For every extra year of official support for Dunfell, this can offer a new LTS kernel version, that can be

I think that defeats the idea of specific purpose layers? Cheers, Richard

Either that, or it can hold multiple versions... -- Regards, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@...> PGP: 0x420902729A92C964 - https://denix.org/0x420902729A92C964 Fingerprint: 25FC E4A5 8A72 2F69 1186

Should the layer be called kernel-5.10 since there potentially may be other versions? Cheers, Richard

All, The layer has been updated and moved to git.yoctoproject.org under a central mixin repo called "meta-lts-mixins", branch

Hi, Just a reminder about our upcoming OpenEmbedded Happy Hour on July 28 for Europe/Americas timezones @ 1700/5pm UTC (1pm ET / 10am

Paul, Thanks for the review! Right, good point. I put it there for testing and totally forgot about it. Sure, will add a standard MIT one. Yeah, it was missing because GitHub is a temporary

<mark.hatle@...> wrote: Yes, see https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?h=dunfell&id=5981a05525442f1a0db1c4e710b319dbf1fbba8b I missed that one, but it seems safe

"Denys Dmytriyenko" <denis@...> wrote: Hi Denys, This looks like a good initiative. A couple of initial comments: layer.conf contains `PREFERRED_VERSION_linux-yocto ?= "5.10%"`. It'd be

Did someone already backport the change to Dunfell to fix the module.lds for out of tree kernel builds? Master commit 596b0474d3d? For gatesgarth, we ended up porting a copy of this into our