On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Kamble, Nitin A
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]
>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
>> Phil Blundell
>> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 3:10 PM
>> To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 04/10] glibc: bring back the needed
>> support for glibc recipes
>>
>> On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 15:04 -0700, Kamble, Nitin A wrote:
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: [email protected]
>> > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
>> Of
>> > > Phil Blundell
>> > > Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:51 PM
>> > > To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
>> > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 04/10] glibc: bring back the needed
>> > > support for glibc recipes
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 08:01 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> > > > From: Nitin A Kamble <[email protected]>
>> > > >
>> > > > Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble <[email protected]>
>> > >
>> > > This commit message is very terse.  Why is this change necessary?
>> >
>> > Because meta-x32 layer has glibc, which needs these support files. I
>> will update the commit message in the tree.
>>
>> Can't the tclibc-glibc file go in meta-x32 as well, then?
>>
> It can go in the meta-x32 layer, but I think better place for this support 
> file is in the meta layer. It would help avoid duplication of the code in 
> multiple layers.

Part of the answer here is that obsolete / etc things don't belong in
the core, but in other layers that need them.  My read on things is
that we've removed glibc in favor of eglibc...

-- 
Tom

_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to