On Mar 24, 2015 9:36 AM, "Otavio Salvador" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mar 24, 2015, at 4:56 AM, Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I'd prefer to do it once and avoid adding another recipe and handle
> >> same problems we had solved there. Also this allows for example the
> >> use of i.MX patches on meta-fsl-arm.
> >
> > My usecase is not i.MX moreover I do not have i.MX h/w to test as well,
current set work fine for the architectures I need it for, if someone wants
to help in testing on other machines, its welcome. however as I said, it
will be in subsequent work to unite both recipes due to the overhead as
explained in last email.
>
> I am not asking you to test cef3 on i.MX, this is fine. I don't want
> another giant build recipe with duplication.

I am aware of that. This let's other folks hands on it with a working
version. Moving cef to latest chromium is a bigger exercise and will delay
this. That's the motivation.
>
> --
> Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
> http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
> Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
-- 
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Reply via email to