On 10/19/2013 12:29 AM, Joe MacDonald wrote:
Hi Roy,
Is this different from the patch I received from Ming Liu about a month
ago? It doesn't look it at first glance, but I didn't diff the two.
-J.
Sorry, I did not sync my repo, LiuMing patch is OK.
Thanks
-Roy
[[oe] [PATCH 2/2 meta-n
Thanks for your replies. It was very reassuring that I'm not doing the wrong
thing.
--
Søren Holm
___
Openembedded-devel mailing list
Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> * 3.3 is used by default mesa config, 2.8 is used in meta-java, keep 2.9 as
> last in 2*
who is using 2.9 ? I would suggest to keep the one we know is used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa
> ---
> meta-oe/recipes-core/llvm/llvm3.2/arm_fen
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Paul Eggleton
wrote:
> On Monday 21 October 2013 09:29:27 Anders Darander wrote:
>> "Søren Holm" wrote:
>> >What is the best way to manage a private repo with recipes as well as
>> >meta-oe,
>> >meta-core and meta-angstrom.
>> >
>> >Currently I have a private repo
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> * it's causing huge deploy/licenses files:
> 211Mdeploy/licenses/bigbuckbunny-480p
> 317Mdeploy/licenses/bigbuckbunny-720p
> 886Mdeploy/licenses/bigbuckbunny-1080p
> and avi checksum is already verified by SRC_URI checksum
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 09:29:27AM +0100, Anders Darander wrote:
>
>
> "Søren Holm" wrote:
> >Hello
> >
> >What is the best way to manage a private repo with recipes as well as
> >meta-oe,
> >meta-core and meta-angstrom.
>
> >Currently I have a private repo that has the layers attached as
> >s
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:58:45AM +0200, Andrea Adami wrote:
>>
>> > qemux86* common (5):
>> > meta-openembedded/meta-initramfs/recipes-bsp/images/initramfs-kexecboot-klibc-image.bb,
>> > do_rootfs
>>
>>
>> Hi Martin, thanks for taking ca
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:58:45AM +0200, Andrea Adami wrote:
>
> > qemux86* common (5):
> > meta-openembedded/meta-initramfs/recipes-bsp/images/initramfs-kexecboot-klibc-image.bb,
> > do_rootfs
>
>
> Hi Martin, thanks for taking care of all those builds.
> About this new do_rootfs failure [1],
On 21 October 2013 09:29, Anders Darander wrote:
> We're doing the same internally at ChargeStorm. One benefit is that we're
> having our
> "master" repo keeping track of all the layers that we're using and which
> revision of
> those layers.
Guacamayo uses a master repository with submodules f
On Monday 21 October 2013 09:29:27 Anders Darander wrote:
> "Søren Holm" wrote:
> >What is the best way to manage a private repo with recipes as well as
> >meta-oe,
> >meta-core and meta-angstrom.
> >
> >Currently I have a private repo that has the layers attached as
> >submodules. Is that a crazy
> qemux86* common (5):
> meta-openembedded/meta-initramfs/recipes-bsp/images/initramfs-kexecboot-klibc-image.bb,
> do_rootfs
Hi Martin, thanks for taking care of all those builds.
About this new do_rootfs failure [1], it seems related to update-rc.d
/postinst code.
As you already know, for thi
On 20 October 2013 20:43, Martin Jansa wrote:
> libtool-cross-2.4.2: libtool-cross: configure was passed unrecognised
> options: --with-sysroot
> libxdmcp-1.1.1: libxdmcp: configure was passed unrecognised options:
> --without-groff --disable-malloc0returnsnull --without-ps2pdf --disable-specs
>
"Søren Holm" wrote:
>Hello
>
>What is the best way to manage a private repo with recipes as well as
>meta-oe,
>meta-core and meta-angstrom.
>Currently I have a private repo that has the layers attached as
>submodules. Is
>that a crazy setup or what?
We're doing the same internally at ChargeS
13 matches
Mail list logo