Re: [oe] [2011.03-maintenance] commit 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, I just accidently committed 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?h=2011.03-maintenanceid=89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9on the maintenance branch. My intention was to commit this to master and send a maintenance pull request, but as i did not notice that my branch was on 2011.03-maintenance, I accidently pushed to that branch (actually somewhat surprizing me, as i did not expect to be able to push against that branch). I'll leave it to the maintainers to decide on how to handle this. I would like to see this recipe in the maintenance branch too thoguh. The patch moves the recipe from the 2007_365 version to the 2010_365 version. commit message: *kicks gmail for not marking this important* Well, how does this fit against the rest of the requirements for the branch? In other words, have you gotten all of these changes in somewhere else so they won't be lost? -- Tom ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [2011.03-maintenance] commit 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9
2012/1/16 Tom Rini tr...@kernel.crashing.org On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, I just accidently committed 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9 http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?h=2011.03-maintenanceid=89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9 on the maintenance branch. My intention was to commit this to master and send a maintenance pull request, but as i did not notice that my branch was on 2011.03-maintenance, I accidently pushed to that branch (actually somewhat surprizing me, as i did not expect to be able to push against that branch). I'll leave it to the maintainers to decide on how to handle this. I would like to see this recipe in the maintenance branch too thoguh. The patch moves the recipe from the 2007_365 version to the 2010_365 version. commit message: *kicks gmail for not marking this important* Well, how does this fit against the rest of the requirements for the branch? In other words, have you gotten all of these changes in somewhere else so they won't be lost? Hi Tom, Not sure what you exactly mean. The change is also in oe classic master. oe-core does not carry this recipe (and if I recall correctly meta-oe neither does) As it stands the patch simplifies the recipe as the uclibc specific patch is not needed any more (and hence is dropped). And maybe I caused confusion: the changes I listed in the commit message are the official changes between 2007_365 and 2010_365, not changes I made to the code. In fact the recipe is pretty straightforward. Best regards, Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [2011.03-maintenance] commit 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/1/16 Tom Rini tr...@kernel.crashing.org On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, I just accidently committed 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9 http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?h=2011.03-maintenanceid=89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9 on the maintenance branch. My intention was to commit this to master and send a maintenance pull request, but as i did not notice that my branch was on 2011.03-maintenance, I accidently pushed to that branch (actually somewhat surprizing me, as i did not expect to be able to push against that branch). I'll leave it to the maintainers to decide on how to handle this. I would like to see this recipe in the maintenance branch too thoguh. The patch moves the recipe from the 2007_365 version to the 2010_365 version. commit message: *kicks gmail for not marking this important* Well, how does this fit against the rest of the requirements for the branch? In other words, have you gotten all of these changes in somewhere else so they won't be lost? Hi Tom, Not sure what you exactly mean. The change is also in oe classic master. oe-core does not carry this recipe (and if I recall correctly meta-oe neither does) As it stands the patch simplifies the recipe as the uclibc specific patch is not needed any more (and hence is dropped). And maybe I caused confusion: the changes I listed in the commit message are the official changes between 2007_365 and 2010_365, not changes I made to the code. In fact the recipe is pretty straightforward. So long as the recipe changes exist somewhere else then yes, I'm OK with this accident. We don't currently have special hooks setup to make the maintenance branch only writable by me and I'm not sure if it's worth adding to our admins workload. -- Tom ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
Re: [oe] [2011.03-maintenance] commit 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9
2012/1/16 Tom Rini tom.r...@gmail.com On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/1/16 Tom Rini tr...@kernel.crashing.org On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks fransmeulenbro...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, I just accidently committed 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9 http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?h=2011.03-maintenanceid=89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9 on the maintenance branch. My intention was to commit this to master and send a maintenance pull request, but as i did not notice that my branch was on 2011.03-maintenance, I accidently pushed to that branch (actually somewhat surprizing me, as i did not expect to be able to push against that branch). I'll leave it to the maintainers to decide on how to handle this. I would like to see this recipe in the maintenance branch too thoguh. The patch moves the recipe from the 2007_365 version to the 2010_365 version. commit message: *kicks gmail for not marking this important* Well, how does this fit against the rest of the requirements for the branch? In other words, have you gotten all of these changes in somewhere else so they won't be lost? Hi Tom, Not sure what you exactly mean. The change is also in oe classic master. oe-core does not carry this recipe (and if I recall correctly meta-oe neither does) As it stands the patch simplifies the recipe as the uclibc specific patch is not needed any more (and hence is dropped). And maybe I caused confusion: the changes I listed in the commit message are the official changes between 2007_365 and 2010_365, not changes I made to the code. In fact the recipe is pretty straightforward. So long as the recipe changes exist somewhere else then yes, I'm OK with this accident. We don't currently have special hooks setup to make the maintenance branch only writable by me and I'm not sure if it's worth adding to our admins workload. -- I'll make sure it won't happen again (at least not by me). As I was unaware this could happen I did not really pay attention to the branch when pushing (actually I was under the impression I was on master) Best regards, Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
[oe] [2011.03-maintenance] commit 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9
Dear all, I just accidently committed 89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?h=2011.03-maintenanceid=89cb863234616620d172984ff173f1d84ce4caa9on the maintenance branch. My intention was to commit this to master and send a maintenance pull request, but as i did not notice that my branch was on 2011.03-maintenance, I accidently pushed to that branch (actually somewhat surprizing me, as i did not expect to be able to push against that branch). I'll leave it to the maintainers to decide on how to handle this. I would like to see this recipe in the maintenance branch too thoguh. The patch moves the recipe from the 2007_365 version to the 2010_365 version. commit message: ntpclient: updated to 2010_365 version Changes since ntpclient_2007_365: -- fixed type of sa_xmit_len, thanks vapier -- dropped underscores in spelling of adjtimex(2), might make uClibc happier -- include netdb.h and always define _BSD_SOURCE to get prototype for herror -- minor formatting to align with Nilsson's fork -- add -fno-strict-aliasing as needed by traditional network coding style The 2nd -- also implies our local patch is not needed any more Apologies for any inconvenience. Frans ___ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
