Hello,
if there was a plan to divide bitbake into a server and a client part, I
would suggest to add a kind of "fetching proxy" functionality or run
mode to the bitbake sever part.
The reason behind this suggestion is: If you sitting behind a
restrictive proxy/firewall and want to use yocto (OE)
On 04/23/2013 05:27 PM, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
W dniu 23.04.2013 11:04, Richard Purdie pisze:
"all succeeded" does not look like a reason to fail a build.
Agreed, please open a bug for it.
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4397
I marked 4397 as the duplication of this
W dniu 23.04.2013 11:04, Richard Purdie pisze:
>> > "all succeeded" does not look like a reason to fail a build.
> Agreed, please open a bug for it.
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4397
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-c
On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 21:12 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 22.04.2013 16:16, Richard Purdie pisze:
> > I've been giving some thought to where BitBake needs to go in the
> > future in order to deliver for its users. It started life as a
> > commandline utility and its grown a lot since
> -Original Message-
> From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org
> [mailto:openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf Of
> Richard Purdie
> Sent: den 22 april 2013 16:16
> To: bitbake-devel
> Cc: openembedded-core
> Subject: [OE-core
W dniu 22.04.2013 16:16, Richard Purdie pisze:
> I've been giving some thought to where BitBake needs to go in the
> future in order to deliver for its users. It started life as a
> commandline utility and its grown a lot since it was first created.
> I think there are some key decisions that nee
I've been giving some thought to where BitBake needs to go in the future
in order to deliver for its users. It started life as a commandline
utility and its grown a lot since it was first created. I think there
are some key decisions that need to be taken to ensure its future
growth.
The first pro
