Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-04 Thread Koen Kooi
Op 4 jun. 2012, om 12:39 heeft Martin Jansa het volgende geschreven: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 05:31:26PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: >> >> >> On 06/01/2012 06:35 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: >>> >>> Op 1 jun. 2012, om 12:02 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: >>> On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 1

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-04 Thread Martin Jansa
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 05:31:26PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > > > On 06/01/2012 06:35 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: > > > > Op 1 jun. 2012, om 12:02 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > > > >> On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 11:04 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >>> Op 1 jun. 2012, om 10:17 heeft Richard Purd

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-04 Thread Robert Yang
On 06/01/2012 06:35 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 1 jun. 2012, om 12:02 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 11:04 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 1 jun. 2012, om 10:17 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 17:01 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: O

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-01 Thread Koen Kooi
Op 1 jun. 2012, om 12:02 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 11:04 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: >> Op 1 jun. 2012, om 10:17 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: >> >>> On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 17:01 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Ro

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-01 Thread Richard Purdie
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 11:04 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > Op 1 jun. 2012, om 10:17 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > > > On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 17:01 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >> Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > >> > >>> There is a bug if we: > >>> 1)

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-01 Thread Koen Kooi
Op 1 jun. 2012, om 10:17 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven: > On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 17:01 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: >> Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: >> >>> There is a bug if we: >>> 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 >>> 2) bitbake core-

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-06-01 Thread Richard Purdie
On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 17:01 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > > > There is a bug if we: > > 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 > > 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay > > > > Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i58

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-31 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/31/2012 11:01 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: There is a bug if we: 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crown

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-31 Thread Koen Kooi
Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > There is a bug if we: > 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 > 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay > > Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crownbay's > image even if there is one i

[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-31 Thread Robert Yang
There is a bug if we: 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crownbay's image even if there is one in deploy/ipk/core2 and we have set the core2's priority higher than i586, when the

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-26 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/26/2012 04:07 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 26 mei 2012, om 08:28 heeft Martin Jansa het volgende geschreven: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 25 mei 20

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-26 Thread Martin Jansa
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 04:35:32PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > > > On 05/26/2012 04:19 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 04:15:09PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 05/26/2012 02:28 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > >>> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wr

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-26 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/26/2012 04:19 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 04:15:09PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: On 05/26/2012 02:28 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55P

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-26 Thread Martin Jansa
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 04:15:09PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > > > On 05/26/2012 02:28 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > >>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrot

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-26 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/26/2012 02:28 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: There is a

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-26 Thread Koen Kooi
Op 26 mei 2012, om 08:28 heeft Martin Jansa het volgende geschreven: > On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: >> >> >> On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Rober

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Martin Jansa
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 10:47:31AM +0800, Robert Yang wrote: > > > On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >> > >> Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > >> > >>> There is a bug if we: > >>> 1) bit

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Robert Yang
I'm sorry that I forgot to update the PR bump, I've updated it for both opkg_0.1.8.bb and opkg_svn.bb: -PR = "${INC_PR}.0" +PR = "${INC_PR}.1" and pushed the updated patch to: git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib robert/ipk_arch http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=robert/i

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/26/2012 10:47 AM, Robert Yang wrote: On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: There is a bug if we: 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 2) bi

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/25/2012 07:30 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: There is a bug if we: 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay T

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Robert Yang
On 05/25/2012 07:19 PM, Koen Kooi wrote: Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: There is a bug if we: 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crown

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Richard Purdie
On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 13:30 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > > > > Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > > > > > There is a bug if we: > > > 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 > > > 2) bitbake cor

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Martin Jansa
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:19:55PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > > Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > > > There is a bug if we: > > 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 > > 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay > > > > Then several pkgs in depl

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Koen Kooi
Op 25 mei 2012, om 12:02 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven: > There is a bug if we: > 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 > 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay > > Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crownbay's > image even if there is one i

[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

2012-05-25 Thread Robert Yang
There is a bug if we: 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crownbay's image even if there is one in deploy/ipk/core2 and we have set the core2's priority higher than i586, when the