On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Tom Rini <tom_r...@mentor.com> wrote: > On 04/06/2011 11:27 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Tom Rini <tom_r...@mentor.com> wrote: >>> On 04/06/2011 10:26 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Tom Rini <tom_r...@mentor.com> wrote: >>>>> On 04/06/2011 10:05 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Tom Rini <tom_r...@mentor.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 04/05/2011 11:18 PM, Khem Raj wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Tom Rini <tom_r...@mentor.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> The previous 5.7 release was relatively close to 5.8 due to it >>>>>>>>> bringing >>>>>>>>> in a patch to sync with upstream work-in-progress. We skip over the >>>>>>>>> 5.8 release and move to 5.9. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> there already are patches for 5.9 available too >>>>>>>> ftp://invisible-island.net/ncurses/5.9/ncurses-5.9.patch.gz >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wrong link? That reverse applies to ncurses 5.9 release. But >>>>>>> regardless, is ncurses something we need to be tracking top of tree for? >>>>>>> It seems like we needed to for 5.7 since there had been a lot going on >>>>>>> without a release but that seems to have changed now. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> those patches usually contain critical bug fixes including security >>>>>> updates >>>>>> so it will be of interest to keep track of it >>>>> >>>>> Well, it doesn't currently. And while I agree we need to do a good job, >>>>> everywhere, of keeping track of security updates, I don't think we >>>>> should move back to depending on a site that frequently removes patches. >>>>> >>>> >>>> yes. cache the patches like yocto did for 5.7 recipes >>> >>> That still leaves the problem of there not being a valid patch there at >>> the moment. And I still don't see why ncurses needs to be in the bucket >>> of recipes we track the scm for rather than relying on the latest stable >>> release. >> >> 5.9 was released few days back so that patch might be lean for now >> but I assume overtime it will get fatter > > It's invalid at the moment, yes. But you haven't explained why ncurses > needs to be in the bleeding edge bucket. Usually this is for stuff that > hasn't really reached a stability point. > It does not have to be but those patches are cumulative fixed that are done on top of a release. I am sure we will also run into the problems those will fix thats why its better to keep and eye on them > -- > Tom Rini > Mentor Graphics Corporation >
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core