at least typo in tegra-storage-layout-base_35.5.0.bb

[tjhgit]

bug report here

[dwalkes]

Thanks @tjhgit however I think rather than changing the BSP layer for this mender specific issue it would probably be better to either:

1. Modify the mender layer to use the updated location in scarthgap (preferred) or
2. Put this change in a bbappend within the mender layer.

Note that I think scarthgap support for mender is still a work in progress, you may want to sync up with the PR at mendersoftware/meta-mender-community#402

[tjhgit]

ok @dwalkes . But there is still the typo in the meta-tegra code: PARTITION_LAYOUT_EXERNAL . It is missing a T.

[dwalkes]

@tjhgit thank you I see that now. Can you modify the commit to change only this single line?

[dwalkes]

You also need to sign off your commit per our contributor guidelines.

[tjhgit]

@dwalkes . Regarding changing the rest, I assume this would be here, right: ./meta-mender-tegra/recipes-bsp/tegra-binaries/tegra-storage-layout-base_%.bbappend ?

Sure will modify the commit to only the single line.

[dwalkes]

@tjhgit correct, although it looks like there should be handling for this already at https://github.com/mendersoftware/meta-mender-community/blob/scarthgap/meta-mender-tegra/recipes-bsp/tegra-binaries/tegra-storage-layout-base_%25.bbappend#L4

[dwalkes]

@tjhgit still missing signoff and you should squash your commits. I can just propose a PR myself now that I understand the issue if you prefer.

[tjhgit]

@dwalkes . Sorry I am not so good at this ... I issued a git commit -s ... So kind that you offer to take over. Regarding: https://github.com/mendersoftware/meta-mender-community/blob/scarthgap/meta-mender-tegra/recipes-bsp/tegra-binaries/tegra-storage-layout-base_%25.bbappend#L4 , I think this function is using the wrong location: do_install:append:tegra194()

[dwalkes]

So kind that you offer to take over

No problem, thanks for reporting. I've opened #1685

I think this function is using the wrong location: do_install:append:tegra194()

Makes sense, so yes this is the change you could propose in that layer in a new PR.