On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:50:36AM +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > 2010/1/7 Graeme Gregory <[email protected]>: > > On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 11:09:10PM +0100, Rolf Leggewie wrote: > >> allergic to COMPATIBLE_MACHINE for no particular reason). Bitbake can't > >> do versioned depends and so we can't say that $bb2-$version does not > >> compile with gcc less than 3.4.x, for example. Those are just two > >> examples. XorA "solved" this in a hackish way with angsstrom.bbclass. > >> > > No he didnt and no its not a hack. Its a blacklist of packages that for > > various reasons Angstrom NEVER wants built. > > Should we have such a blacklist per machine? > My sheevaplug rungs angstrom, but as it has no display it has no need > for an X server, nor for ide or pci or sata tools. > It follows the standard overide rules (or should do) so you should be able to blacklist per machine.
Of course you chose a bad example as I know quite a few people are using the sheeva with usb displaylink adapters. Graeme _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
