From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [68.230.241.41] (helo=fed1rmmtao105.cox.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L9Q1r-0004CT-0E for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 21:14:59 +0100 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao105.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20081207201108.JOGP8485.fed1rmmtao105.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 15:11:08 -0500 Received: from localhost ([68.230.61.57]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id oLB71a00C1E665w04LB7ne; Sun, 07 Dec 2008 15:11:07 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=ZsG32m1HjQCr_ES-F8YA:9 a=Bi-fvjrfDcDTBb0qjCDtAeIwi_UA:4 a=LY0hPdMaydYA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 13:11:18 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org Message-ID: <20081207201118.GD15204@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <1223383906-4111-1-git-send-email-eha@doredevelopment.dk> <20081202174141.GB16628@smtp.west.cox.net> <1228250322.5456.70.camel@dax.rpnet.com> <20081202212155.GG16628@smtp.west.cox.net> <20081206214525.GJ16628@smtp.west.cox.net> <20081207193340.GC15204@smtp.west.cox.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Organization: Embedded Alley Solutions, Inc User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Subject: Re: Canadian SDK support 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: Sun, 07 Dec 2008 20:14:59 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 09:00:47PM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote: > On 07-12-08 20:33, Tom Rini wrote: > >> As an aside, gcc-cross-sdk on arm(v6 only?) is blowing up in fortran, >> but I've got a git bisect narrowing that down now (30 revs left). > > gcc-cross-sdk picks the wrong patch (from files/gfortran.patch) instead > of the correct one from gcc-4.2.4/gfortran.patch. gcc-cross *does* pick > the right patch. For gcc-4.2.4.inc would it be OK to rename gfortran.patch to gfortran-4.2.4.patch and fix this problem? -- Tom Rini