From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-bw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.214.47]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P3r1O-0004pM-21 for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:00:37 +0200 Received: by bwz7 with SMTP id 7so433192bwz.6 for ; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 07:00:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=MOjdO6A9w0saKwxGTAZemDNz3btpLoJWtiwxHCsWRJg=; b=Vew+Jo0eiZh5gzKNCeCCPxoYh5wOhiVs72kVWJVuEUi9Sbf/eFH/+u8gUrDngeYS9U 86gGaxUCTPIqnoAl8r4PdI7bOoTrVuPYoIVaRDCLooiuTgm0hvxWG4vh1YeFRAHDIlFC teFT6wwDGx5skZ4FEUG8idcRaqPbkirsDDyZE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=kqbbarfOtjErYNT06Cv18rHZTj9mG0heXP4RsiSPlCFMI3lZzDxCjOsrC25ZYztpVf I+JdUvbPpEM1KD/1EmMClr9Fe4ScZYTPwTsfS/dnAW5XGuk/j852ax/suSUhogs93G7p bHsZM9LtT0VWJzS7krnIPZ0jxD+CDOkQXgYK8= Received: by 10.204.126.161 with SMTP id c33mr707159bks.108.1286460008683; Thu, 07 Oct 2010 07:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (161-24.13.24.78.awnet.cz [78.24.13.161]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x13sm1664624bki.12.2010.10.07.07.00.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 07 Oct 2010 07:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:00:16 +0200 From: Martin Jansa To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Message-ID: <20101007140016.GC3163@jama> References: <4CADCF1E.3090602@mentor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4CADCF1E.3090602@mentor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.47 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: martin.jansa@gmail.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: Updating libtiff 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, 07 Oct 2010 14:00:37 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 06:46:06AM -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > Hey all, > > I'm looking to update libtiff to cover some security issues in the > version we ship, and I noticed something funny about how we do it today. > Currently tiff_3.9.2.bb sets PV to 3.9.2+4.0.0beta5 and grabs and > builds 4.0.0beta5. While it's possible that in the past 3.9.2 was > intended to be the last 3.9.x, it wasn't. > > I think we should go with: > - Add tiff_4.0.0beta6.bb which should be compatible with beta5 and will > get upgrades right. > - Add tiff_3.9.4.bb as well, in case someone wants to stay on the > released line. > > Anyone see a problem with that? Isn't PV="4.0.0" < PV="4.0.0beta5"? Then it would be better to stay with 3.9.2+4.0.0beta* sheme for easy upgrade path to 4.0.0 release. at least that's the reason why I have ie: KERNEL_RELEASE = "2.6.36-rc7" OLD_KERNEL_RELEASE = "2.6.35" PV = "${OLD_KERNEL_RELEASE}+${KERNEL_RELEASE}+gitr${SRCPV}" Regards, -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com