* Andreas Müller <schnitzelt...@googlemail.com> [160223 22:38]:
> > * Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> [160130 18:07]:
> >
> >> diff --git a/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-raspberrypi.inc
> >> b/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-raspberrypi.inc
> >> index 70e8bfe..0798788 100644
> >> --- a/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-raspberrypi.inc
> >> +++ b/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-raspberrypi.inc
> >> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ do_rpiboot_mkimage() {
> >> if test "x${KERNEL_IMAGETYPE}" != "xuImage" ; then
> >> if test -n "${KERNEL_DEVICETREE}"; then
> >> # Add RPi bootloader trailer to kernel image to enable
> >> DeviceTree support
> >> - ${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}/usr/lib/rpi-mkimage/mkknlimg --dtok
> >> ${KERNEL_OUTPUT} ${KERNEL_OUTPUT}
> >> + ${STAGING_DIR_NATIVE}${libexecdir}/mkknlimg --dtok
> >> ${KERNEL_OUTPUT} ${KERNEL_OUTPUT}
> >> fi
> >> fi
> >> }
> This patch is mandatory but there was a serial with additional fixes
> send by Maciej Borzecki on Feb 2nd. I think this is worth taken into
> account.
>
Yes, that's right.
If the rest of the patches in that series is non-controversial, could we
have them applied? Otherwise, could we have Khem's patch applied, and
the other series rebased upon that?
We've had the master branch non-building for quite a while now...
I'm just keen to get either of those patches applied to
meta-raspberrypi. I'd like to avoid having to use a local fork as much
as possible...
Cheers,
Anders
--
Anders Darander, Senior System Architect
ChargeStorm AB / eStorm AB
--
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
