On 3/31/14, 12:31 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
On 31 March 2014 18:03, Richard Purdie
<[email protected]> wrote:
I kind of disagree with that, the LSB image can take into account
configuration in other parts of the system. If pam isn't configured, I'm
not sure that should automatically make it completely unbuildable...
An image that claims to be LSB compliant but due to
not-immediately-obvious DISTRO_FEATURES isn't actually doesn't seem
like a good idea to me, fwiw. If the LSB image requires PAM, X11 and
so on then it should require the features.
I agree the image with the name LSB should enforce the items it knows the LSB
depends on. If the user patches that away then it becomes their issue.
--Mark
Ross
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
