That's good to know, thanks.
Ross
On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 12:41, Alexey Brodkin
wrote:
>
> Hi Ross,
>
> On Fri, 2018-09-21 at 11:55 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote:
> > I don't like accumulating pending patches for something as key as
> > binutils, are these actually working their way upstream now?
>
>
Hi Ross,
On Fri, 2018-09-21 at 11:55 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote:
> I don't like accumulating pending patches for something as key as
> binutils, are these actually working their way upstream now?
Sure they are!
Our team development is very upstream targeted, i.e. we try to
submit all our changes
I don't like accumulating pending patches for something as key as
binutils, are these actually working their way upstream now?
Ross
On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 21:44, Alexey Brodkin
wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin
> ---
>
> Changes v1 -> v2:
>
> * Added upstream status
>
> meta/recipes-dev
Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin
---
Changes v1 -> v2:
* Added upstream status
meta/recipes-devtools/binutils/binutils-2.31.inc | 4 +
...location-where-GOT-information-is-collect.patch | 201 +
...bustness.-Return-FALSE-in-case-of-NULL-po.patch | 38
...lobal-symbo
