On 14-03-31 03:47 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
-Khem
On Mar 31, 2014 12:33 PM, "Bruce Ashfield" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> On 14-03-31 03:29 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Bruce Ashfield
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> -LINUXLIBCVERSION ?= "3.10"
>>> +LINUXLIBCVERSION ?= "3.14"
>>
>>
>> Does this buy us much ? Infact its too late to change usespace APIs
>
>
> This was always the plan. I've been building with all the 3.14 -rc
> headers for ages .. and as we've talked about in the past, we always
> will update them to the newest kernel in any release.
well i think its good to update them however may be some components
should be given enough soak time and kernel headers are one of such
pieces since its effects are across layers and they will start testing
them now.
To be fair, we've had the -dev kernel and headers available for
over a month now.
This is also my second send of this series, so it isn't like this
hasn't been available or broadcast.
People noticing it now, or being busy, isn't something I can directly
control.
>
> They are compatible with 3.10, and I've tested the combinations of
> old kernels, new libc and new kernels with the new libc interfaces.
i dont believe you tested all layer combinations
I've tested everything I can, as has the autobuilder. I can't offer
any more than this.
>
>
>> at this point. 3.10 being LTS
>> I would assume its a better option to keep at 3.10
>
>
> I disagree, this is consistent with other releases and the documented
> plan of action. I'd rather not have a massive version jump in the fall.
its probably not a bad option to stick to LTS version for kernel headers
after all
Again, I disagree.
We can maybe keep the 3.10 recipe around, but the default should
be 3.14, we need a matched kernel and libc-headers to get the best
integration
and leveraging of the latest features.
If we pull the headers, pull the kernel.
Bruce
>
> Sure 3.14 slipping out by a few weeks upstream was a problem, but its
> not like we haven't been testing with it.
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
