From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [82.71.203.194] (helo=crown.reciva.com) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MvtHR-0007IF-4i for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:43:45 +0200 Received: from castle.reciva.com ([82.71.203.193] helo=lurch.internal.reciva.com) by crown.reciva.com with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MvtGS-0006H3-Vp for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:42:41 +0100 Received: from mill.internal.reciva.com ([192.168.106.87] ident=pb) by lurch.internal.reciva.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MvtGQ-0004Yk-RS for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:42:38 +0100 From: Phil Blundell To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <200910081523.06229.holger+oe@freyther.de> References: <20091008125302.GE10797@xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk> <200910081523.06229.holger+oe@freyther.de> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:42:35 +0100 Message-Id: <1255009355.6355.4.camel@mill.internal.reciva.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.71.203.194 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: philb@gnu.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxtogo.org); Unknown failure Subject: Re: Revert Request for linux -> linux-gnu changes X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:43:45 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 15:23 +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > As hard as it is. I agree that it should be backed out and put in a branch and > tested on non EABI systems. We find new regressions every day. Yes, I agree. It isn't even completely obvious to me that this change has a great deal of merit. As I wrote in: http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2009-September/013577.html it doesn't seem as if switching TARGET_OS from "linux" to "linux-gnu" brings any benefits other than trivial cosmetic ones, and it is a shame to break everybody's builds just for that. So, personally, I would be tempted to just revert it and leave it reverted rather than burning a lot of manpower on trying to make "linux-gnu" work for everybody at once. If individual DISTROs want to switch to linux-gnu then they are obviously welcome to do so and pick up the pieces for themselves. p.