On Oct 17, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Richard Purdie <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 17:42 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: >> Adapt the recipes to fetch a tarball. >> Tarball is generated from latest 2.16 branch >> which has e500-math_private.patch already applied >> hence we remove that patch. >> >> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <[email protected]> >> >> What the motivation to move to the tarball? > > svn:// recipes depend on subversion-native. Having switched to the new > ubversion version, we've in a nasty position of it being hard to > ASSUME_PROVIDED with the API breakage. > > Building subversion-native is a pain and delays the core part of the > build significantly. Switching to tarball recipes should improve our > build speed a lot. > > So its mainly for performance reasons that we should do this. > > My only question is whether we need to include the svn revision in the > tarball name? may be yes thats a fine idea, I thought I would do it but it slipped my mind I think its fine to rename the tar files the revision they are generated from is 21224. I will ask them to be renamed. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
