Martin Jansa wrote:
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 06:46:06AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
Hey all,
I'm looking to update libtiff to cover some security issues in the
version we ship, and I noticed something funny about how we do it today.
Currently tiff_3.9.2.bb sets PV to 3.9.2+4.0.0beta5 and grabs and
builds 4.0.0beta5. While it's possible that in the past 3.9.2 was
intended to be the last 3.9.x, it wasn't.
I think we should go with:
- Add tiff_4.0.0beta6.bb which should be compatible with beta5 and will
get upgrades right.
- Add tiff_3.9.4.bb as well, in case someone wants to stay on the
released line.
Anyone see a problem with that?
Isn't PV="4.0.0" < PV="4.0.0beta5"?
Then it would be better to stay with 3.9.2+4.0.0beta* sheme for easy
upgrade path to 4.0.0 release.
at least that's the reason why I have ie:
KERNEL_RELEASE = "2.6.36-rc7"
OLD_KERNEL_RELEASE = "2.6.35"
PV = "${OLD_KERNEL_RELEASE}+${KERNEL_RELEASE}+gitr${SRCPV}"
Ah right. But the problem is that we're more like back in the "not
quite 2.6.0" days of the kernel. Unless we just skip out on doing 3.9.4
itself, which I guess is possible.
--
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
