Patch aarch64.patch adds aarch64 support for xserver-xorg 1.13.1 in
header file servermd.h. And aarch64 is supported in version 1.15.1
already and the patch causes redefine error.
So remove aarch64.patch.
Signed-off-by: Kai Kang
---
.../xorg-xserver/xserver-xorg/aarch64.patch| 35 --
On 09/09/2014 01:05 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Mon, 2014-09-08 at 18:53 -0700, Armin Kuster wrote:
override USER_CLASSES as prelink does not currently
work on ppc64
---
meta/conf/machine/qemuppc64.conf | 16
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 meta/conf/
From: Roy Li
It is a GPLv2 package
Signed-off-by: Roy Li
---
.../texinfo/texinfo-4.8/check-locale-h.patch | 28 ++
.../texinfo-4.8/do-compile-native-tools.patch | 49 +
.../texinfo-4.8/using-native-makeinfo.patch| 24 +
meta/recipes-exte
On 10 September 2014 21:21, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>
>> I've started running the patchwork post-receive hook manually and
>> marking as submitted many patches in the queue, but as there's 132
>> patches of patches still (down from 140-odd!) in an
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>
> I've started running the patchwork post-receive hook manually and
> marking as submitted many patches in the queue, but as there's 132
> patches of patches still (down from 140-odd!) in an attempt to restore
> sanity to the oe-core I think
Hi,
I've started running the patchwork post-receive hook manually and
marking as submitted many patches in the queue, but as there's 132
patches of patches still (down from 140-odd!) in an attempt to restore
sanity to the oe-core I think we should just mark as obsolete every
patch that was submitt
From: Randy Witt
Previously the function always used os.getcwd() for the location to
write the locked signatures file. However, that isn't easily used by
calling tasks, so only use os.getcwd() if the caller doesn't specify
a path.
Signed-off-by: Randy Witt
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton
---
met
Add an SDK_POST_INSTALL_COMMAND variable which allows additional
commands to be added towards the end of the SDK install script, for e.g.
additional processing that needs to be done as part of installing the
SDK.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton
---
meta/classes/populate_sdk_base.bbclass | 7 +++
A couple of changes related to the developer workflow work (see
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6662 ).
Unfortunately the user facing parts of that are some way off
being ready for submission but here are a couple of the minimal
core pieces we need to make those work.
(Note that
On 09/10/2014 10:13 AM, Darren Hart wrote:
On 9/10/14, 1:27, "Richard Purdie"
wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 17:42 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources
installed on the target. The kernel-dev package as defined by
kernel.bbclass is heavi
On 14-09-10 11:27 AM, Brandt, Todd E wrote:
I think David brings up a good point about only needing the kernel
source when something goes wrong. How about a compromise. What if we
provided a simply utility which pulls in the kernel source and
recreates the existing kernel image by using git (with
On 9/10/14, 1:27, "Richard Purdie"
wrote:
>On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 17:42 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources
>> installed on the target. The kernel-dev package as defined by
>> kernel.bbclass is heavily pruned to minimize packaging time
Fixes two HTTP cookie related security bugs:
1. CVE-2014-3613
2. CVE-2014-3620
Changelog:
http://curl.haxx.se/changes.html#7_38_0
Signed-off-by: Maxin B. John
---
meta/recipes-support/curl/{curl_7.37.1.bb => curl_7.38.0.bb} | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
re
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 14:49 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Misc patches, kernel-dev upgrade, QA support for automated ptest execution.
>
> The initial full nightly autobuilder run failed dramatically due to valgrind
> failing to configure. This is now fixed, and verified with a run of
> nigh
On 14-09-10 10:24 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 10:11 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On 14-09-10 04:27 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 17:42 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources
installed on the target. T
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 10:11 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 14-09-10 04:27 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 17:42 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> >> I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources
> >> installed on the target. The kernel-dev package as defined
On Wednesday 10 September 2014 19:39:58 Bryan wrote:
> Can u please tell me which latest bitbake version i can use with
> oe-classic. I used bitbake version 1.8.12 with my infra. So i need to use
> bitbake version which would be suitable with my old recipes as well.
If you use 1.8.12 and it works,
On 14-09-10 04:27 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 17:42 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources
installed on the target. The kernel-dev package as defined by
kernel.bbclass is heavily pruned to minimize packaging time and siz
Can u please tell me which latest bitbake version i can use with
oe-classic. I used bitbake version 1.8.12 with my infra. So i need to use
bitbake version which would be suitable with my old recipes as well.
Regards
Bryan
On Sep 10, 2014 7:13 PM, "Bryan" wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> Do you
On Wednesday 10 September 2014 19:13:58 Bryan wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> Do you know any forked repository where we can found support
> for glibc 2.11.x, 2.12.x onwards.
I don't, no, sorry. I don't keep track of OE-Classic forks and OpenEmbedded no
longer maintains OE-Classic.
Cheers,
Pau
Hi,
Misc patches, kernel-dev upgrade, QA support for automated ptest execution.
The initial full nightly autobuilder run failed dramatically due to valgrind
failing to configure. This is now fixed, and verified with a run of
nightly-x86-64.
Ross
The following changes since commit 0d3c79524c95a7
Hi Paul,
Do you know any forked repository where we can found support
for glibc 2.11.x, 2.12.x onwards.
One more query is related to glibc version. Does it become eglibc in later
versions as we could not get later version recipes.
Actually i have an old infra and i need to support i
I'm not sure if this is the right mailing list for our problem. Please forgive
me if not (and tell me the right one).
We're investigating some problems related with package versions going backwards
using a PR Service[1].
Can someone give some hints where we can get information about generation
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 17:42 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> I'm working on a project which needs to have the full kernel sources
> installed on the target. The kernel-dev package as defined by
> kernel.bbclass is heavily pruned to minimize packaging time and size and
> is intended to enable building of
24 matches
Mail list logo
