On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 11:21 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> That is rather weird.  What happens if you "bitbake -v glibc-2.4"?

At a guess, bitbake is rejecting the 2.4 version as unbuildable, perhaps
as one of its dependencies isn't provided (or a dependency of a
dependency). I think there is magic in the angstrom distro files that
"fixes" this. Perhaps it was this:

PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-libc-for-gcc = 
"glibc-intermediate"
PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/arm-linux-libc-for-gcc = "glibc-intermediate"

It would be nice if bitbake was a little more verbose about such things.

Richard

_______________________________________________
Oe mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.handhelds.org/mailman/listinfo/oe

Reply via email to