On Monday 13 May 2013 11:00:56 Saul Wold wrote: > On 05/12/2013 10:55 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > On Sunday 12 May 2013 19:54:50 Phil Blundell wrote: > >> On Sun, 2013-05-12 at 08:40 -0700, Saul Wold wrote: > >>> On 05/12/2013 06:27 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >>>> I think so, it'd be good to have it in oe-core and allow use of vpn :) > >>> > >>> I would like to see what the full dependency set looks like for these, > >>> clearly there is the vpnc, openvpn, l2tp and pptp recipes, but what else > >>> and what licenses are they under. > >> > >> I don't think we necessarily want openvpn, l2tpd and suchlike in > >> oe-core. None of those things seem very "core" to me (in an embedded > >> context) and testing them seems like it would be a bit of a challenge. > > > > I agree, these don't belong in OE-Core. We already have them in meta- > > networking. > > This is what I get for replying to an email while traveling overseas and > not being 100% clear about my points. > > I was more interested in the dependencies then actually thinking about > including them in OE-Core,that was not my intent. > > This would would allow us to better understand if those recipes not in > meta-networking could be moved from meta-oe to meta-networking. > Currently, I think vpnc and pptp are in meta-networking, not the other 2.
They are all in meta-networking (xl2tpd, pptp-linux and vpnc have always been there, openvpn got moved in mid-April). Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
