On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:55:00PM +1100, Jonathan Liu wrote:
> On 12 October 2016 at 23:18, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:54:22AM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> >> Either use 4.7.99+4.8-rc4 like most other recipes do or at least "4.8~rc4"
> >> which
On 12 October 2016 at 23:18, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:54:22AM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> Either use 4.7.99+4.8-rc4 like most other recipes do or at least "4.8~rc4"
>> which might sort lower than "4.8" (but needs to be verified for all
>>
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:54:22AM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> Either use 4.7.99+4.8-rc4 like most other recipes do or at least "4.8~rc4"
> which might sort lower than "4.8" (but needs to be verified for all
> packaging backends first).
>
> Ignoring all this completely results with what we can
On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 10:07 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> >
> > On Oct 6, 2016, at 2:27 AM, Richard Purdie > ndation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 10:54 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > >
> > > Either use 4.7.99+4.8-rc4 like most other recipes do or at least
> >
> On Oct 6, 2016, at 2:27 AM, Richard Purdie
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 10:54 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> Either use 4.7.99+4.8-rc4 like most other recipes do or at least
>> "4.8~rc4"
>> which might sort lower than "4.8" (but needs to be verified
On 6 October 2016 at 10:27, Richard Purdie <
richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I wish we knew for certain whether ~ works properly everywhere. A good
> case for some unittests I guess...
>
I own the bug for that and there's actually a start at this in
poky-contrib. The problem is
On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 10:54 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> Either use 4.7.99+4.8-rc4 like most other recipes do or at least
> "4.8~rc4"
> which might sort lower than "4.8" (but needs to be verified for all
> packaging backends first).
>
> Ignoring all this completely results with what we can see in