Hi,
I'm wondering how to do a kernel rebuild after doing changing the .config using
bitbake -c menuconfig virtual/kernel
I've tried forcing a recompile using:
bitbake -ccompile -f virtual/kernel
that indeed rebuilds the kernel
However if I then do a bitbake virtual/kernel this does not result in
We are experiencing the following issue with Yocto v.12
We generated the qte4 toolchain for arm (bitbake meta-toolchain-qte) and
we successfully obtained poky-elibc-x86_64-arm-toolchain-qte-1.2.tar.bz2
as output.
Problem is that such toolchain does not seem to contain the QtDeclarative
library
On 12-05-11 03:07 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering how to do a kernel rebuild after doing changing the .config using
bitbake -c menuconfig virtual/kernel
I've tried forcing a recompile using:
bitbake -ccompile -f virtual/kernel
that indeed rebuilds the kernel
However if I then do
2012/5/11 Bruce Ashfield bruce.ashfi...@windriver.com:
On 12-05-11 03:07 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering how to do a kernel rebuild after doing changing the .config
using
bitbake -c menuconfig virtual/kernel
I've tried forcing a recompile using:
bitbake -ccompile -f
On 12-05-11 08:51 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
2012/5/11 Bruce Ashfieldbruce.ashfi...@windriver.com:
On 12-05-11 03:07 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering how to do a kernel rebuild after doing changing the .config
using
bitbake -c menuconfig virtual/kernel
I've tried forcing a
2012/5/11 Bruce Ashfield bruce.ashfi...@windriver.com:
On 12-05-11 08:51 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
2012/5/11 Bruce Ashfieldbruce.ashfi...@windriver.com:
On 12-05-11 03:07 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering how to do a kernel rebuild after doing changing the
.config
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
the base common-pc.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related options
into the files that include the base common-pc.scc
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
the base common-pc-64.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related
options into the files that include the base common-pc-64.scc
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
oops ^
the base crownbay.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related options
into the files that include the
Same comments as for crownbay...
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
oops ^
the base emenlow.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related options
You know the drill, same as last three
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
the base jasperforest.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related
options into the files
For the series:
Acked-by: Darren Hart dvh...@linux.intel.com
On 05/08/2012 02:39 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
More updates for meta-intel 1.2
The following changes since commit 749a127f0b813d314c3515fc14dc144d0d44fcfb:
Darren Hart (1):
Yes.
I saw the same failures too.
For some reason 3.0 kernel fetch failures started showing up for Cedartrail.
There is a discussion thread on this in the mailing list.
Bruce might be able to give some pointers on this.
-Kishore.
From: yocto-boun...@linux.intel.com
Same comments as for crownbay
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
oops ^
the base fishriver.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related
ditto
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
the base sugarbay.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related options
into the files that include the base sugarbay.scc
On 12-05-11 01:04 PM, Bodke, Kishore K wrote:
Yes.
I saw the same failures too.
For some reason 3.0 kernel fetch failures started showing up for Cedartrail.
There is a discussion thread on this in the mailing list.
Bruce might be able to give some pointers on this.
Unfortunately not. From
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:12 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 05/10/2012 05:59 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Use the available ehci and uhci usb features and remove the associated
config settings from the top-level common-pc feature.
On 12-05-11 09:12 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
2012/5/11 Bruce Ashfieldbruce.ashfi...@windriver.com:
On 12-05-11 08:51 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
2012/5/11 Bruce Ashfieldbruce.ashfi...@windriver.com:
On 12-05-11 03:07 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering how to do a
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:15 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
the base common-pc.scc while moving the more 'policy'-related options
On 12-05-11 03:26 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:12 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 05/10/2012 05:59 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussitom.zanu...@intel.com
Use the available ehci and uhci usb features and remove the associated
config settings from the top-level
On 12-05-10 09:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussitom.zanu...@intel.com
This set of patches factors out the policy vs hardware-related config
of the common-pc and common-pc-64 along with some meta-intel BSPs.
There are also a couple usb cleanups as well.
This is an RFC
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 16:17 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
On 12-05-10 09:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussitom.zanu...@intel.com
This set of patches factors out the policy vs hardware-related config
of the common-pc and common-pc-64 along with some meta-intel BSPs.
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:18 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
oops ^
the base crownbay.scc while moving the
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 17:08 -0500, Tom Zanussi wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:18 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 05/10/2012 06:00 PM, tom.zanu...@intel.com wrote:
From: Tom Zanussi tom.zanu...@intel.com
Refactor bsp/common-pc/common-pc* to keep hardware-related options in
oops
On 05/11/2012 03:08 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:18 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
Independent from this patch, but does crownbay have all three? ehci and
ohci seems a lot more likely to me.
lsusb shows ehci and ohci, but why did you think ohci would be more
likely?
Tom
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 15:35 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
On 05/11/2012 03:08 PM, Tom Zanussi wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 09:18 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
Independent from this patch, but does crownbay have all three? ehci and
ohci seems a lot more likely to me.
lsusb shows ehci and
26 matches
Mail list logo
