Since we're all in on our igloo/Linaro co-developed method we'd like to stop working on staging-snowball (Linaro kernel) and focus our efforts on landing-snowball (igloo kernel). Does anyone have any objections?
There hasn't been any work/support done o staging-snowball since the middle of December. The output from staging-snowball should be ignored.
On the flip side I wouldn't delete it. It it is very useful to have SW GL build and an accelerated build.
Mathieu.
On 12-01-24 09:05 AM, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
Hello Zach:
On 24 January 2012 11:05, Zach Pfeffer zach.pfeffer@linaro.org wrote:
From my perspective, that is a great idea. However, I would like us to
pick less cryptic names. People can't easily associate the Landing-snowball build with the igloo kernel. Can we adopt a simpler naming scheme such as official and community. I know we need to make this change across other landing teams as well but it is worth the pain.
anmar
On 24 January 2012 11:39, anmar.oueja@linaro.org anmar.oueja@linaro.orgwrote:
Anmar,
You are right. We do need to fix the names. How would a tuple work:
<kernel src>-<gcc version>-<AOSP version>-<target>
So staging-snowball would be:
linaro-gcc4.6-aosp4.0.3-snowball
and landing-snowball would be
igloo-gcc4.6-aosp4.0.3-snowball
What do you think?
anmar
On 24 January 2012 13:02, Zach Pfeffer zach.pfeffer@linaro.org wrote:
-- snip --
so if we use the igloo 3.2 branch it will be igloo3.2-gcc4.6-aosp4.0.3-snowball and for using the tracking kernel we use iglootracking-gcc4.6-aosp-4.0.3-snowball?
anmar
linaro-android@lists.linaro.org
-
anmar.oueja＠linaro.org -
Mathieu Poirier -
Zach Pfeffer