On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 10:06 -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote: > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:48 +0000, Burton, Ross wrote: > > On 21 November 2012 21:32, Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@windriver.com> > > wrote: > > > atom-pc should probably be using the 3.4 kernel, but that's a > > > question for Darren/Tom/Nitin (so I've added them to the cc), since > > > there may be a reason (with respect to graphics) as to why it is on > > > 3.0. > > > > Ping Darren/Tom/Nitin. > > > > atom-pc is certainly lagging behind by still being on 3.0, and I can't > > see any reason why we'd want to stick with 3.0 for graphics. In fact > > as the most common graphics driver used on atom-pc is a i965 we want a > > modern kernel as that is where the development is. > > > > I don't know of any technical reason for it to still be at 3.0. > > Until recently all of the 'core machines' were at 3.0 and probably the > assumption was that whoever upgraded those in the past would also be > upgrading atom-pc - has that changed?. > > So who does own the core machines and if that doesn't cover atom-pc, > then who owns that?
As I understood it, WR owns the non-IA core machines, you (as in the Intel team) own the IA ones, namely atom-pc. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ linux-yocto mailing list linux-yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/linux-yocto