On 02/21/2011 05:42 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
Ping. Is there any reason not to apply this patch? Is there a better way
to solve the problem?
On 02/11/2011 02:25 PM, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
On 02/11/2011 02:18 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
On 11-02-11 14:02, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
* Allow precompiled modules to depend on a specific kernel version.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter<[email protected]>
---
classes/kernel.bbclass | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/classes/kernel.bbclass b/classes/kernel.bbclass
index 0d1b4ad..55e3ca0 100644
--- a/classes/kernel.bbclass
+++ b/classes/kernel.bbclass
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
inherit linux-kernel-base module_strip
-PROVIDES += "virtual/kernel"
+PROVIDES += "virtual/kernel virtual/kernel-${PV}"
DEPENDS += "virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}gcc
virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}depmod-${@get_kernelmajorversion('${PV}')}
virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}gcc${KERNEL_CCSUFFIX} update-modules bluez-dtl1-workaround"
# we include gcc above, we dont need virtual/libc
How is PV know before the kernel is built? The line below has a
workaround for that, so I guess it also needs one in PROVIDES, no?
KERNEL_VERSION is what's unknown until after the build. PV is the
version set by the recipe. The line below uses PV to derive 2.4 or 2.6
from that.
Does this mean we sometimes create package files with unresolvable /
incorrect deps? Or just that it's a bit tricky looking at times?
--
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
