On 01/05/2013 07:44 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:46 AM, David Nyström <[email protected]>wrote:
On 01/05/2013 03:26 PM, lei yang wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 5:55 AM, David Nyström <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 01/05/2013 02:43 PM, [email protected] wrote:
From: Lei Yang <[email protected]>
I think we should hold on this merge completely. netcat is already covered
by meta-networking, so
we should be consolidating patches and support there.
If there are any specific meta-virt requirements for netcat, we should
either use bbappends (and
depend on meta-networking, or use the combo-layer tools to pull the support
directly) or better yet
get them merged into meta-networking.
Cheers,
Bruce
I'm totaly OK with this, as long as its accepted somewhere.
As Lei states though, we need to document the layer setup in README.
However, for future reference, I see no reason why new recipes can't end
up in meta-virtualization first for a usable working setup, and when
accepted upstream, they will be removed.
I suggest we use
recipes-external/meta-<potential-upstream-here>/new-recipe-name/ until
accepted elsewhere.
Br,
David
_______________________________________________
meta-virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-virtualization
_______________________________________________
meta-virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-virtualization
