[oe] [meta-python][PATCH] ] python-oauthlib: Add python-oauthlib and python3-oauthlib.

This patch adds python-oauthlib and python3-oauthlib. Signed-off-by: Bhargava Sreekantappa Gayathri Signed-off-by: Manjukumar Matha Signed-off-by: Alejandro Enedino Hernandez Samaniego ---

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > I could combo-layer pieces of meta-oe into poky but I'd imagine that > would create more problems than it would solve too and given the > general dislike of combo-layer, I think ultimately better layer

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 23:27 +0100, Martin Jansa wrote: > Richard, I agree with all you said. > > But I still don't see how replacing meta-oe git repository with 10 > different git repositories helps with anything. > > It won't give you more time, it would only cause more work to already >

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Richard Purdie > wrote: >> I could combo-layer pieces of meta-oe into poky but I'd imagine that >> would create more problems than it would

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

Richard, I agree with all you said. But I still don't see how replacing meta-oe git repository with 10 different git repositories helps with anything. It won't give you more time, it would only cause more work to already exhausted and (re)tired meta-oe maintainers. It won't make the layers

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:27 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > Richard, I agree with all you said. > > But I still don't see how replacing meta-oe git repository with 10 > different git repositories helps with anything. > > It won't give you more time, it would only cause more

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > On 2/20/18 9:13 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:50 AM, akuster808 wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 02/20/2018 02:45 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: Hi, Is now a good time to talk

Re: [oe] [meta-qt5][PATCH] qtbase: Replace -isystem with -I

i can still see it with 5.10.1 from /mnt/a/zonit/oe-build/build/tmp/work/aarch64-bec-linux/qtbase/5.10.1+gitAUTOINC+6c6ace9d23-r0/git/src/gui/kernel/qgenericpluginfactory.cpp:40:

[oe] [meta-oe][PATCH] fix(p7zip): fix CVE-2017-17969

From: Radovan Scasny Signed-off-by: Radovan Scasny Signed-off-by: Andrej Valek --- .../p7zip/files/CVE-2017-17969.patch | 31 ++ meta-oe/recipes-extended/p7zip/p7zip_16.02.bb

[oe] Splitting meta-oe?

Hi, Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else causes them to break world builds (one example: meta-gnome). I've long felt that

Re: [oe] [meta-qt5][PATCH v2] qtbase: add a config option to optimize for size

Hi, that's not what is wrong with this. What you're doing is: PACKAGECONFIG[optimize-size] = "-optimize-size,-optimize-size" when -Os is enabled and PACKAGECONFIG[optimize-size] = "-optimize-size" when it isn't but, that's not how PACKAGECONFIG is used by any sane person. What you should do is

[oe] [meta-python][PATCH] python-evdev: add python3 version of the recipe

Signed-off-by: Maxin B. John --- meta-python/recipes-devtools/python/python-evdev.inc| 15 +++ .../recipes-devtools/python/python-evdev_0.7.0.bb | 17 + .../recipes-devtools/python/python3-evdev_0.7.0.bb | 2 ++ 3 files changed,

[oe] [meta-qt5] qtbase-native/qmake broken for 5.10?

Hi, giving Qt 5.10.0 a build I ran into the following issue detected by meta-qt5-extra/sddm build failure: Running native 'qmake -query' outputs | qmake -query | Empty filename passed to function |

Re: [oe] [meta-qt5][PATCH v2] qtbase: add a config option to optimize for size

Hi Martin, Thanks for your feedback. I failed to find a right way to add the inline function. That’s why I added new variable. I tried to update like below but it caused a syntax error. The function (bb.utils.contains) was not evaluated and just copied as a string. Could you kindly advise me

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

[[oe] Splitting meta-oe?] On 18.02.20 (Tue 10:45) Burton, Ross wrote: > Hi, > > Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are > actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are > basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else

[oe] [meta-qt5][PATCH v3] qtbase: add a config option to optimize for size

The '-optimize-size' option would enable the compiler to optimize for size instead of speed. If the global compiler option already included '-Os', this option would be enabled by default. It would affect the whole Qt libraries and Qt applications as well. This feature is available in Qt 5.9+.

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 20/02/2018 12.45, Burton, Ross wrote: Hi, Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else causes them to break world builds (one

[oe] [PATCH] nodejs: Update from 8.9.0 -> 8.9.4

Update nodejs to latest stable release 8.9.4 Signed-off-by: Parthiban Nallathambi --- .../recipes-devtools/nodejs/{nodejs_8.9.0.bb => nodejs_8.9.4.bb}| 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) rename meta-oe/recipes-devtools/nodejs/{nodejs_8.9.0.bb =>

[oe] [PATCH] nodejs: Remove unreferenced patches

From: Jonathan Liu Signed-off-by: Jonathan Liu Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa --- ...isable-running-gyp-files-for-bundled-deps.patch | 29 --- .../nodejs/nodejs/no-registry.patch| 59 -- 2

[oe] [PATCH] nodejs: Update from 8.4.0 -> 8.9.4

Update nodejs to latest stable release 8.9.4 Signed-off-by: Parthiban Nallathambi --- .../recipes-devtools/nodejs/{nodejs_8.4.0.bb => nodejs_8.9.4.bb}| 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) rename meta-oe/recipes-devtools/nodejs/{nodejs_8.4.0.bb =>

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 02/20/2018 02:45 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: > Hi, > > Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are > actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are > basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else causes them > to break world

Re: [oe] [meta-qt5][PATCH v2] qtbase: add a config option to optimize for size

Hi, Now I got to know the meaning of your response. I had tried to solve the problem with PACKAGECONFIG[optimize-size] only. I will send the updated patch soon. Thanks for your advice. Best regards, Kwangsub From: Martin Jansa Date: Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 7:05

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:50 AM, akuster808 wrote: > > > On 02/20/2018 02:45 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are >> actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are >> basically

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

Repositories have reputations. OE-Core is fairly heavily curated and tested and has certain "guarantees" about what people can expect to work. The meta-oe repo is a little trickier as the different pieces do have different 'SLA's (service level agreements). Some pieces like

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

I still fail to see how splitting the layers into separate repositories will magically help with the quality of recipes stored there. meta-python, meta-perl, meta-filesystems, meta-gnome, meta-networking, meta-webserver, meta-xfce all depend on meta-oe layer. Build testing fewer layers in

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 2/20/18 10:52 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 10:40 -0800, Khem Raj wrote: >> On 2/20/18 10:00 AM, Tim Orling wrote: >>> I am open to discussion about what direction we go. Individual >>> layers that >>> are curated and built together by YP auto builders sounds like an >>>

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 2/20/18 9:46 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > Repositories have reputations. OE-Core is fairly heavily curated and > tested and has certain "guarantees" about what people can expect to > work. The meta-oe repo is a little trickier as the different pieces do > have different 'SLA's (service level

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

The recent improvements to the Auto Upgrade Helper have made maintenance of meta-perl less effort and therefore you have seen an uptick in my updates to recipes. I also plan to mass-add ptest to all perl module recipes "sometime soon", which will further simplify my upgrade workflow and add to the

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 10:40 -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > On 2/20/18 10:00 AM, Tim Orling wrote: > > I am open to discussion about what direction we go. Individual > > layers that > > are curated and built together by YP auto builders sounds like an > > intriguing path. If this was coupled with

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 2/20/18 9:13 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:50 AM, akuster808 wrote: >> >> >> On 02/20/2018 02:45 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are >>> actively developed and maintained

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 2/20/18 10:00 AM, Tim Orling wrote: > The recent improvements to the Auto Upgrade Helper have made maintenance of > meta-perl less effort and therefore you have seen an uptick in my updates > to recipes. I also plan to mass-add ptest to all perl module recipes > "sometime soon", which will

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 2/20/18 2:45 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: > Hi, > > Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are > actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are > basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else causes them > to break world builds

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 11:15 -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > On 2/20/18 10:52 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 10:40 -0800, Khem Raj wrote: > > > > > > On 2/20/18 10:00 AM, Tim Orling wrote: > > > > > > > > I am open to discussion about what direction we go. Individual > > > >

Re: [oe] Splitting meta-oe?

On 02/20/2018 10:40 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > On 2/20/18 10:00 AM, Tim Orling wrote: >> The recent improvements to the Auto Upgrade Helper have made maintenance of >> meta-perl less effort and therefore you have seen an uptick in my updates >> to recipes. I also plan to mass-add ptest to all perl