-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 27-04-10 20:21, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 12:14 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi, >> >> Currently conflicting headers are both in glibc-dev and >> linux-libc-headers-dev, which isn't a good thing. According to the >> interwebs we should use the linux-libc-headers version. >> >> Anyone opposed to removing the scsi headers from glibc? It would >> basically involve reverting >> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/commit/?id=b8bb2a62b3916470c752bd79d31322b4358fc676 >> and >> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/commit/?id=83f41716ab6a2a9d83d4ff044dcef00595ecfeb2 > > So, I did both of those after checking the interwebs and poking some > kernel folks (see comments in > http://bugs.openembedded.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4262 ). The question is, > did the kernel folks change their mind again
I would guess so, since l-l-h 2.6.32 still has the headers.... > and we need to either drop > older linux-libc-headers (which I'll just assume is a no-go) or go back > to removing them in new enough linux-libc-headers. I have no real preference, but removing them from l-l-h would be the easiest option. My immediate problem is that I need to be able to install both glibc-dev and l-l-h-dev on the target to show off native qt4 compilation. regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFL1zSaMkyGM64RGpERAnFdAJ40UWtXamdRU8oTLd9ILE1BdeApuwCeJo3M 4Cg9iYa3MeFktzS1H4hP+A0= =x1El -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
