Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 11/03/2017 05:08 PM, akuster808 wrote: > >> SRCPV causes package versioning havoc. You can not tell what version >> 1.1.8+git(hash) or 1.1.8+git(hash) is the latest on a system. Can your >> package manage figure that out? > > I thought

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On 11/03/2017 05:08 PM, akuster808 wrote: SRCPV causes package versioning havoc. You can not tell what version 1.1.8+git(hash)  or 1.1.8+git(hash) is the latest on a system. Can your package manage figure that out? I thought the entire point of SRCPV is to provide something that is guaranteed

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On 11/02/2017 05:21 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Kanavin > wrote: >> On 11/02/2017 07:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >> >>> Changes since v2: Move to 1.1.18 release >>> -PV = "1.1.16+git${SRCPV}" >>> +PV = "1.1.18+git${SRCPV}" >> >> Can you drop this, and simpl

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On 11/02/2017 06:10 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: I agree partially; if it points to a tag it can be said in a comment ... using SRCPV for this kind of recipe makes sense as it allows for easy tracking of the revision in use. But you can use SRCREV for that. Why the need specifically for SRCPV?

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 11/02/2017 02:21 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Kanavin >> wrote: >>> >>> On 11/02/2017 07:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>> Changes since v2: Move to 1.1.18 release -PV = "1.1.16+git${S

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 11/02/2017 05:28 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > >> >> Can you drop this, and simply rename the recipe to >> musl_1.1.18.bb please? >> > >> > Why? keeping it on _git makes sense to me. >> >> >> We always

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On 11/02/2017 05:28 PM, Khem Raj wrote: >> Can you drop this, and simply rename the recipe to musl_1.1.18.bb please? > > Why? keeping it on _git makes sense to me. We always use a given srcrev always this time It just happens to match with release B

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:24 AM Alexander Kanavin < alexander.kana...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > On 11/02/2017 02:21 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Kanavin > > wrote: > >> On 11/02/2017 07:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > >> > >>> Changes since v2: Move to 1.1.18

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On 11/02/2017 02:21 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: On 11/02/2017 07:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: Changes since v2: Move to 1.1.18 release -PV = "1.1.16+git${SRCPV}" +PV = "1.1.18+git${SRCPV}" Can you drop this, and simply rename the recipe to

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 11/02/2017 07:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > >> Changes since v2: Move to 1.1.18 release >> -PV = "1.1.16+git${SRCPV}" >> +PV = "1.1.18+git${SRCPV}" > > > Can you drop this, and simply rename the recipe to musl_1.1.18.bb please? Why? keepin

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

On 11/02/2017 07:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: Changes since v2: Move to 1.1.18 release -PV = "1.1.16+git${SRCPV}" +PV = "1.1.18+git${SRCPV}" Can you drop this, and simply rename the recipe to musl_1.1.18.bb please? Alex -- ___ Openembedded-core mailing l

[OE-core] [PATCH V3] musl: Update to 1.1.18

Rich Felker (10): fix use of memset without declaration in sched.h cpu set macros fix access by setjmp and longjmp to __hwcap on arm built as thumb2 for executing init array functions, use function type with prototype fix read-after-free type error in pthread_detach fi