On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 09:34 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:
new version
diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0fe1b5e 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset
update accroding your suggestion.
This patch is for bitbake indeed, but bitbake is not part of
openembedded. Is it RIGHT?
diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..acf4e96 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,34 @@ else
Oh, sorry, I have found the git tree of openembedded-core.
On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 10:31 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:
update accroding your suggestion.
This patch is for bitbake indeed, but bitbake is not part of
openembedded. Is it RIGHT?
diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
In our technical team call today we spent some time discussing how to
support distribution releases that are due to happen around the time of Yocto
1.1.
Yocto 1.1 is scheduled for release on October 6th[1], the same month
in which both Ubuntu and Fedora have new releases planned[2,3].
first sorry about that, indeed I don't know how to commit a patch, so
just paste the diff result here.
diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0da8bc0 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,20 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
On 07/13/2011 01:04 AM, NiQingliang wrote:
first sorry about that, indeed I don't know how to commit a patch, so
just paste the diff result here.
diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0da8bc0 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6
new version
diff --git a/oe-init-build-env b/oe-init-build-env
index 77332a7..0fe1b5e 100755
--- a/oe-init-build-env
+++ b/oe-init-build-env
@@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ else
$OEROOT/scripts/oe-setup-builddir
unset OEROOT
unset BBPATH
+
+ # find the python 2.x, if the default python is not.
+
In our technical team call today we spent some time discussing how to
support distribution releases that are due to happen around the time of
Yocto 1.1.
Yocto 1.1 is scheduled for release on October 6th[1], the same month in
which both Ubuntu and Fedora have new releases planned[2,3].
OpenSUSE
On 07/12/2011 11:51 AM, Joshua Lock wrote:
In our technical team call today we spent some time discussing how to
support distribution releases that are due to happen around the time of
Yocto 1.1.
Yocto 1.1 is scheduled for release on October 6th[1], the same month in
which both Ubuntu and
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 12:01 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 07/12/2011 11:51 AM, Joshua Lock wrote:
In our technical team call today we spent some time discussing how to
support distribution releases that are due to happen around the time of
Yocto 1.1.
Yocto 1.1 is scheduled for release
On 07/12/2011 12:26 PM, Joshua Lock wrote:
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 12:01 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
Final note: I'm left wondering if this emails contents also make sense
as a wiki page?
Some sort of distro links for schedule page would be great. If people
want to share that they are testing
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 12:01 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 07/12/2011 11:51 AM, Joshua Lock wrote:
In our technical team call today we spent some time discussing how to
support distribution releases that are due to happen around the time of
Yocto 1.1.
Yocto 1.1 is scheduled for release
I think Archlinux is the preferred choice.-_-
Just joke.
I doubt why the bitbake need python2.x but just use /bin/env python. I
think If it need a specific version python, it should write it in the
shebang. e.g. /bin/env python2.6
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 05:08 +0800, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Tue,
OK, I will do it.:)
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:31 +0800, Joshua Lock wrote:
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 10:19 +0800, NiQingliang wrote:
/usr/bin/env python2
/usr/bin/env python2.7
These are both valid on Fedora 15, iirc before distributions started
shipping Python 3 they were less common
14 matches
Mail list logo
