On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:28 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?
>

Yes please do or it is a nightmare to track it back to a revision.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: [email protected]  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Reply via email to