Hi,
I am getting error while Building Qt5 using yocto on Wandboard refering to
the link
http://wiki.wandboard.org/index.php/Building_Qt5_using_yocto_on_Wandboard
At the time of
$ bitbake meta-toolchain-qt5
I am getting error, i have posted that error in wandboard forum -
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com
---
.../ipsec-tools/ipsec-tools/glibc-2.20.patch | 23 ++
.../ipsec-tools/ipsec-tools_0.8.2.bb | 1 +
2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
luajit as well as acpitests build system has mind of its own and does not
respect CC and friends in makefiles so we have to inject
the CFLAGS via EXTRA_OEMAKE, some of ABI defining params
e.g. float-abi selection is mentioned in TUNE_CCARGS and
not in TOOLCHAIN_OPTIONS. This causes build to go for
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com
---
meta-oe/recipes-support/ckermit/ckermit_301.bb | 57 -
meta-oe/recipes-support/ckermit/ckermit_302.bb | 58 ++
2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com
---
meta-oe/recipes-graphics/numlockx/numlockx_1.2.bb | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-graphics/numlockx/numlockx_1.2.bb
b/meta-oe/recipes-graphics/numlockx/numlockx_1.2.bb
index ec875f0..47ec504 100644
Also fix the git SRC_URI location
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com
---
meta-networking/recipes-support/lowpan-tools/lowpan-tools_git.bb | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/meta-networking/recipes-support/lowpan-tools/lowpan-tools_git.bb
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com
---
.../libmtp/libmtp-1.1.5/glibc-2.20.patch | 36 ++
.../recipes-connectivity/libmtp/libmtp_1.1.5.bb| 1 +
2 files changed, 37 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
From: Roy Li rongqing...@windriver.com
After check the copyright in source file, the license is BSD-4-Clause
Signed-off-by: Roy Li rongqing...@windriver.com
---
meta-networking/recipes-support/tcpdump/tcpslice_1.2a3.bb |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.k...@gmail.com
---
.../recipes-support/ckermit/{ckermit_301.bb = ckermit_302.bb} | 9 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
rename meta-oe/recipes-support/ckermit/{ckermit_301.bb = ckermit_302.bb} (90%)
diff --git
With the feature that checking the disk filled up, the return value of
function write_behind was checked and used to detect the disk status.
While for empty file, without data being written, this function will
return -1 thus the disk filled up error was miss-raised. Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Zhang
This is the current stable release of the 37 series. Since it is no longer
a beta, the DEFAULT_PREFERENCE = -1 bit is removed. Furthermore, this
version adds the angle_use_commit_id flag, which makes the related patch
obsolete.
Signed-off-by: Carlos Rafael Giani d...@pseudoterminal.org
---
Hi,
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or
should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions and
generally there should just be foo_1.2.bb.
Specifically I'm looking at the libunwind
On 09/04/2014 10:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
Hi,
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or
should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions and
generally there should just be foo_1.2.bb.
On 09/04/2014 10:03 AM, Robert Yang wrote:
On 09/04/2014 10:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
Hi,
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or
should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions and
On 09/04/2014 08:03 AM, Robert Yang wrote:
On 09/04/2014 10:12 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
Hi,
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or
should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions
On 4 September 2014 16:41, akuster808 akuster...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the same reason why I have split a bb into two parts when I submit
upgrades. I feel it makes reviewing easier the next time a package gets
upgraded. Trying to find the actual changes between a file being deleted and
the
On 4 September 2014 15:12, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.com wrote:
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or
should they only split to bb/inc if there are multiple versions and
generally there should
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.com wrote:
On 4 September 2014 15:12, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.com wrote:
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split into foo_1.2.bb and foo.inc, or
should they only
On 09/04/2014 01:29 PM, Andreas Müller wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.com wrote:
On 4 September 2014 15:12, Burton, Ross ross.bur...@intel.com wrote:
Quick question of style for the community to bikeshed on: in the
general case should recipes be split
This is to fix the fetcher failure as the stable branch has been
removed. We does not change the revision we are using so this is
a safe change.
Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br
---
recipes-qt/qt5/qtwayland_git.bb | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Switesh Fulpagare
switesh.fulpag...@mindastoneridge.com wrote:
Can you please look at this post? I think it is problem with 'git://
qt.gitorious.org/qt/qtwayland.git
I just sent a patch fixing it; please try it.
--
Otavio Salvador
On 4 September 2014 18:54, Philip Balister phi...@balister.org wrote:
The qwt recipe uses an include file and two bb files for qt versus
qt-embedded builds. I do not know if this is wise, but it is a case not
mentioned here.
That seems a perfectly legitimate use of an inc as it's factoring out
On Monday, September 1, 2014, Andrea Adami andrea.ad...@gmail.com wrote:
For the recipes built with klcc-cross it is necessary to
pass --sysroot otherwise we default to the one encoded in gcc-cross which
actually is the 'first one' built.
The issue was revealed when building for armv4 after
On 09/04/2014 09:26 AM, Burton, Ross wrote:
On 4 September 2014 16:41, akuster808 akuster...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the same reason why I have split a bb into two parts when I submit
upgrades. I feel it makes reviewing easier the next time a package gets
upgraded. Trying to find the actual
On 14-09-01 11:18 AM, Robert Yang wrote:
Bash scripts:
packages-split/sdparm/usr/bin/sas_disk_blink:#!/bin/bash
packages-split/sdparm/usr/bin/scsi_ch_swp:#!/bin/bash
Signed-off-by: Robert Yang liezhi.y...@windriver.com
---
meta-oe/recipes-support/sdparm/sdparm_1.08.bb |2 ++
1 file
On 09/05/2014 05:10 AM, Randy MacLeod wrote:
On 14-09-01 11:18 AM, Robert Yang wrote:
Bash scripts:
packages-split/sdparm/usr/bin/sas_disk_blink:#!/bin/bash
packages-split/sdparm/usr/bin/scsi_ch_swp:#!/bin/bash
Signed-off-by: Robert Yang liezhi.y...@windriver.com
---
26 matches
Mail list logo
