Changelog:
https://www.alsa-project.org/wiki/Changes_v1.2.3.1_v1.2.3.2
Signed-off-by: Tanu Kaskinen
---
.../alsa/{alsa-lib_1.2.3.1.bb => alsa-lib_1.2.3.2.bb} | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
rename meta/recipes-multimedia/alsa/{alsa-lib_1.2.3.1.bb =>
On 7/11/20 6:21 PM, Rahul Kumar wrote:
> CVE: CVE-2018-1000500
>
> Signed-off-by: Rahul Kumar
Does this affect master?
-armin
> ---
> .../busybox/busybox/busybox-CVE-2018-1000500.patch | 98
> ++
> meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox_1.31.1.bb| 1 +
> 2 files
CVE: CVE-2018-1000500
Signed-off-by: Rahul Kumar
---
.../busybox/busybox/busybox-CVE-2018-1000500.patch | 98 ++
meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox_1.31.1.bb| 1 +
2 files changed, 99 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
== Series Details ==
Series: busybox: Security Fix For CVE-2018-1000500
Revision: 1
URL : https://patchwork.openembedded.org/series/25105/
State : failure
== Summary ==
Thank you for submitting this patch series to OpenEmbedded Core. This is
an automated response. Several tests have been
CVE: CVE-2018-1000500
Signed-off-by: Rahul Kumar
---
.../busybox/busybox/busybox-CVE-2018-1000500.patch | 98 ++
meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox_1.31.1.bb| 1 +
2 files changed, 99 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
[Edited Message Follows]
Hi,
i have built a minimal-image for RPI4 and i want cmake to be present on my
image i have added following line for cmake
IMAGE_INSTALL += "libc6-dev virtual-libc-dev cmake"
but on image still i am getting an error like -sh cmake:commang not found
Also now i am
Hi,
i have built a minimal-image for RPI4 and i want cmake to be present on my
image i have added following line for cmake
IMAGE_INSTALL += "libc6-dev virtual-libc-dev cmake"
but on image still i am getting an error like -sh cmake:commang not found
i am i installing cmake in wrong way??Kindly
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 02:58, Taras Kondratiuk (takondra) <
takon...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Oh, thanks. Now it makes a bit more sense. I didn't realize that
> python3native class uses target-specific configuration and target
> sysroot. Shouldn't it be called something like python3cross then?
>
Nope
