Le Fri, 5 Apr 2013 09:34:12 -0300, Otavio Salvador <[email protected]> a écrit :
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Eric Bénard <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Otavio, > > > > Le Thu, 4 Apr 2013 18:16:11 -0300, > > Otavio Salvador <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Mahadevan Mahesh-R9AADQ > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Merge has already been done. Future releases for MX53 and MX28 will be > >> > based off this branch. > >> > > >> > Same branch for both. > >> > >> > >> We are very close of branching to 1.4 release and I am not comfortable > >> in changing the kernel version to a new branch that close. We're using > >> the "oficial" BSP release for now and I'd prefer to change it after we > >> start 1.5 development so we can get a good test coverage. > >> > > We still have 20 days before Yocto 1.4's release to validate these > > changes so if the official Freescale maintainers say this kernel is the > > one to use for i.MX53 and i.MX28 I would trust him and I think it > > would be great to take the opportunity to release 1.4 as a really up to > > date BSP for mature products like i.MX28 and i.MX53. > > > > When looking at the commit log of this branch we can see that it > > contains many fixes so the risk of regression is quite limited. > > If you check the number of fixes included in MX28 1.1.0 and which are > not included in the "maintain" branch, it is a huge delta. Both > 11.09.01 and 1.1.0 cannot be merge on the "maintain" branch without a > HUGE number of conflicts. > Who is in a better place than Freescale's kernel maintainer to say which kernel we should use on their platforms ? Eric _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
