[OE-core] [PATCH] oe-core: Fix base-files wrong softlink of /var/run and /var/lock

2016-02-17 Thread fupan.li
From: fli OE-CORE's fs-perms.txt force /var/run to link /run and /var/lock to /run/lock, so in order to match with it, make base-files /var/run and /var/lock link the absolute path too. Signed-off-by: fli ---

[OE-core] [PATCH] oe-core:package_manager extract target arch from TARGET_SYS and add it into package_archs

2015-12-23 Thread fupan.li
From: fli Since the rpmbuild on the target will use TARGET_SYS as the 'target' to build the source rpm packages, which will extracted the target arch from TARGET_SYS, such as if TARGET_SYS values 'arm-poky-linux-gnueabi', the target arch will be 'arm'. In order to make

[OE-core] [PATCH] package_manager.py: extract target arch from TARGET_SYS

2015-12-18 Thread fupan.li
From: fli Since the rpmbuild on the target will use TARGET_SYS as the 'target' to build the source rpm packages, which will extracted the target arch from TARGET_SYS, such as if TARGET_SYS values 'arm-wrs-linux-gnueabi', the target arch will be 'arm'. In order to make

[OE-core] [PATCH] kernel.bbclass: make multi-version kernel headers coexist on the target

2014-08-19 Thread fupan.li
From: fupan li fupan...@windriver.com Put the kernel headers in /usr/src/kernel-${@legitimize_package_name('${KERNEL_VERSION}')}, so that keep the multi-version kernel headers coexist, just as the kernel image does. Signed-off-by: fupan li fupan...@windriver.com ---

[OE-core] [oe] [kernel.bbclass] [PATCH] let the multi-version kernel header files coexist on the target

2014-08-18 Thread fupan.li
From: fupan li fupan...@windriver.com When do RCPL upgrading, we want to keep the different RCPL's kernel header files coexist, just as the kernel image does. Signed-off-by: fupan li fupan...@windriver.com --- meta/classes/kernel.bbclass | 18 ++ 1 file changed, 14

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] move the benchmark package bonnie++ from meta-oe layer to oe-core and upgrade bonnie++ from 1.03c to 1.03e

2012-11-21 Thread fupan.li
On 11/21/2012 03:46 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:30:25AM +0800, fupan...@windriver.com wrote: From: fli fupan...@windriver.com Why do you think that bonnie++ is core enough to be in oe-core? Cheers, I think it's better to afford those benchmark packages such as lmbench,

[OE-core] [PATCH] move the benchmark package bonnie++ from meta-oe layer to oe-core and upgrade bonnie++ from 1.03c to 1.03e

2012-11-20 Thread fupan.li
From: fli fupan...@windriver.com Signed-off-by: fli fupan...@windriver.com --- recipes-benchmark/bonnie/bonnie++_1.03e.bb | 32 .../bonnie/files/compiler-error-fix.patch | 14 + 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+) create mode 100644