On Jan 16, 2010, at 10:11 AM, "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]> wrote:
> in short, i'm not sure i would even call the local fetcher a > "fetcher". it's simply a way to refer to local content to be somehow > applied to package source. > > does that make more sense? Yes, absolutely. In the context we are in, however, referring to your previous comments, it has no relevance--bitbake doesn't care what you fetch, so it's docs shouldn't cover it. It's interesting that you found local tarballs in the OE repository, however. The only valid reason I can see would be for binary-only packages. Missing upstream isn't a valid argument for this. We have a mirror / website we can use to archive such things. Re: top posting, I agree, I prefer bottom, but haven't fully mastered email from my iPod touch :) -- Chris Larson _______________________________________________ Bitbake-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bitbake-dev
