On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Richard Purdie < richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-12-18 at 08:56 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Marcin Juszkiewicz > > <marcin.juszkiew...@linaro.org> wrote: > > W dniu 18.12.2012 14:32, Bruce Ashfield pisze: > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Richard Purdie On Tue, > > 2012-12-11 > > > > If we bring this in, I'd prefer to completely drop the 3.4 > > kernel > > > headers, since having just one recipe in the tree make > > sense, and it > > > won't tempt us to start having a trail of one libc-header > > per kernel > > > version (since there's always a layer somewhere that's using > > a given > > > version). > > > > > What about a middle ground ? I can pull this into my tree, > > since I'm > > > doing some 3.8 and 3.4-stable work at the moment, I'll > > remove the 3.4 > > > kernel headers and then submit it again as part of my queue > > with some > > > extra tests run ? > > > > > > I am fine with it. > > > > Thanks, I'll pull this in if Richard agrees. > > > > Sounds like a plan to me. > > FYI: I haven't forgotten about this, all the changes are done and tested here. I'm finished digging out of my holiday email queue and will start sending changes out tomorrow if all goes well. Cheers, Bruce > Cheers, > > Richard > > > -- "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end"
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
