> On Dec 14, 2015, at 6:34 AM, Otavio Salvador
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Alexander Kanavin
> wrote:
>> [YOCTO #8765]
>> [YOCTO #8758]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin
>
> This update seems to have break imx53 build[1].
>
> 1.
> http://ci.ossystems.com.br/view/All
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Alexander Kanavin
wrote:
> [YOCTO #8765]
> [YOCTO #8758]
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin
This update seems to have break imx53 build[1].
1.
http://ci.ossystems.com.br/view/All%20failing%20jobs/job/fsl-community-bsp-master-next_x11-imx53qsb/909/consoleText
On 12/11/2015 01:13 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
Can we get the CVE's fix by this update included in the commit?
It's a version update to oe-core's development branch (e.g.
non-production, frequently updated), why have the CVEs in the commit
message?
So that it's clearer when a CVE has been resolv
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 12:50:20 Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> On 12/09/2015 09:52 PM, akuster808 wrote:
> > Can we get the CVE's fix by this update included in the commit?
>
> It's a version update to oe-core's development branch (e.g.
> non-production, frequently updated), why have the CVEs in the comm
On 12/09/2015 09:52 PM, akuster808 wrote:
Can we get the CVE's fix by this update included in the commit?
It's a version update to oe-core's development branch (e.g.
non-production, frequently updated), why have the CVEs in the commit
message? I understand why this is needed for already-relea
Can we get the CVE's fix by this update included in the commit?
- armin
On 12/09/2015 06:40 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> [YOCTO #8765]
> [YOCTO #8758]
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin
> ---
> .../openssl/{openssl_1.0.2d.bb => openssl_1.0.2e.bb} | 4
> ++--
> 1 file chan
[YOCTO #8765]
[YOCTO #8758]
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin
---
.../openssl/{openssl_1.0.2d.bb => openssl_1.0.2e.bb} | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
rename meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/{openssl_1.0.2d.bb =>
openssl_1.0.2e.bb} (94%)
diff --git a
