On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 05:00:35PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 15:28 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > > From: Martin Jansa <martin.ja...@gmail.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <martin.ja...@gmail.com> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> > > Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <martin.ja...@gmail.com> > > ---
Sorry about 3 SOB lines... it's because I had it from oe-core/master-next, but I belive RP will merge master-next first where it's only with his and mine SOB. > This is a bit of a lame checkin message. "Add patch from meta-oe" > doesn't really say anything useful about what you're changing, and there > is no long comment at all. Also ... Rotation didn't work when using VFRB, this patch is fixing that and is from koen upstream repo as patch header says and I cannot probably describe it better then original author. > >@@ -1,25 +1,25 @@ > >-require xorg-driver-driver.inc > >+require xorg-driver-video.inc > > > > SUMMARY = "X.Org X server -- Texas Instruments OMAP framebuffer driver" > > > > DESCRIPTION = "omapfb driver supports the basic Texas Instruments OMAP \ > > framebuffer." > > > >-LICENSE = "MIT-X" > >-LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = > >"file://src/omapfb-driver.c;beginline=1;endline=30;md5=a44c2a37e04d1c2c5f0313afb493f833" > >+LICENSE = "MIT-X & GPLv2+" > >+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=63e2cbac53863f60e2f43343fb34367f" > > DEPENDS += "virtual/libx11" > > ... these changes don't seem to be covered by the description above. because COPYING file wasn't available in SRCREV used in old oe-core version.. so this change is just simplification and improving license metadata, because original MIT-X src/omapfb-driver.c doesn't cover what was explained in COPYING file: The src/omapfb.h header is under the GPL license. > And, finally, if this is an OMAP-specific driver, why is it in oe-core > in the first place? I would have thought it would be better placed in > meta-ti or some such layer. We've discussed it on oe-devel ML already http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2011-September/034781.html now we have very similar recipes in oe-core and meta-oe which is imho worst case.. I'm fine with dropping it from oe-core and keeping it in meta-oe, but I would prefer to keep it in meta-oe ie because nokia900.conf is maintained in meta-smartphone layer and I don't want to add meta-ti as dependency just because this one recipe. Regards, -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
