On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 15:10 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > On 06/13/2011 02:30 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 22:36 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > >> Op 13 jun 2011, om 22:28 heeft Saul Wold het volgende geschreven: > >> > >>> On 06/13/2011 11:31 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> Khem was asking if I could reproduce the recent x86 breakage he was > >>>> seeing[1] and I ran into another bug: > >>>> > >>>> koen@dominion:/OE/tentacle/sources/meta-intel$ git blame > >>>> meta-n450/conf/machine/n450.conf | grep atom > >>>> 158f88d7 (Saul Wold 2011-01-03 15:33:52 -0800 6) require > >>>> conf/machine/atom-pc.conf > >>>> > >>> meta-yocto seems to be the place you need to look! > >>> > >>> I hope that the layering tools can help to detect and inform folks of > >>> this like of dependency. > >> > >> Isn't meta-yocto supposed to a the integration layer with no new > >> parts? I can't use meta-yocto since it has conflicting beagleboard > >> stuff in it, which means that meta-intel is now broken for me as well. > >> That surely isn't the intended plan?!?! > > > > The plan on public record is that atom-pc moves to meta-intel as soon as > > the layer tooling comes online and meta-yocto becomes its own repo > > (which at present its not but its certainly the intent). > > Until then, and even afterwards can we please get some testing of > non-poky builds done? I know the autobuilder is full but can't we toss > a few things onto a personal box and try that a few times a week?
Sure, the more people testing the various combinations the better! Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
