2010/12/1 Graham Gower <graham.go...@gmail.com>: > On 1 December 2010 19:21, Frans Meulenbroeks > <fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2010/12/1 Petr Štetiar <yn...@true.cz>: >>> Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> [2010-11-30 10:12:08]: >>> >>>> Do we already have some resolutions to these issues ? are there >>>> existing patches >>> >>> Yes, there are few patches around, but Koen didn't told us yet[1] what >>> fix/workaround he would preffer for Angstrom 2008/2010. >>> >>> 1. >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org/msg13494.html >>> >>> -- ynezz >> >> OE is more than angstrom, and no single distro should block progress >> for the rest, even not if it is the primary distro. >> My suggestion would be to upgrade uclibc + binutils. to fix things. >> Angstrom then can (and probably already does) pin the current versions. >> >> My 2 cents, Frans. >> > > The alternative is remove uclibc bits from the angstrom distro conf, > removing all doubt about its current status as unsupported/nonworking.
Agree, but that is up to the angstrom maintainers to decide and implement. Frans _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
