On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 06:17 -0700, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 14:27 -0500, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote: > > From: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanu...@intel.com> > > > > oe-core commit dc3a8274c7e935fa564eea142d2535c9bcf2b272 for YOCTO #1428 > > broke meta-intel x86_64 builds: > > > > NOTE: Resolving any missing task queue dependencies > > ERROR: Nothing RPROVIDES 'initramfs-live-install' (but > > /usr/local/src/yocto/sugarbay/meta/recipes-core/images/core-image-minimal-initramfs.bb > > RDEPENDS on or otherwise requires it) > > ERROR: initramfs-live-install was skipped: incompatible with host > > x86_64-poky-linux > > > > This patchset restores the build. > > > > Build and install-tested on sugarbay and crownbay. > > > > More fixes for [YOCTO #1428] > > > > The following changes since commit b86f811663d834064af1e6778c408eb904fad0b9: > > Darren Hart (1): > > n450: update linux-yocto PREFERRED_VERSION to 3.0% > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-intel.git tzanussi/1428-fix > > > > http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-intel/log/?h=tzanussi/1428-fix > > > > Tom Zanussi (2): > > meta-intel/common: create a grub2 version initramfs-live-install > > meta-intel/common: remove initramfs-live-install 1.0 bbappend > > Is there a disadvantage to moving to grub2 in OE-Core and then bringing > these pieces into sync? >
Yes, it would make sense - the plan was to do that during the 1.2 cycle... Tom > Cheers, > > Richard > _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto