On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 04:41 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > back in november, i whined thusly: > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-November/031997.html > > is this the *intended* behaviour? since it seems that if i do a > "bitbake -c fetchall", i should expect that i now have *all* software > related to my target, and that's clearly not the case here.
Someone filed a bug in bugzilla about this. Bitbake is behaving as intended and likely there is missing dependency information in the fetchall case. This is a metadata level problem, not a bitbake one. Patches naturally welcome to add the correct dependency information. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
