Re: [meta-networking][meta-oe][PATCH 1/2] python-m2crypto: add 0.21.1

[Joe MacDonald <Joe.MacDonald@windriver.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3491 bytes --]

[Re: [oe] [meta-networking][meta-oe][PATCH 1/2] python-m2crypto: add 0.21.1] On 13.04.02 (Tue 08:06) Koen Kooi wrote:

> 
> Op 1 apr. 2013, om 23:03 heeft Joe MacDonald <Joe.MacDonald@windriver.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > [Re: [oe] [meta-networking][meta-oe][PATCH 1/2] python-m2crypto: add 0.21.1] On 13.04.01 (Mon 22:33) Koen Kooi wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> Op 1 apr. 2013, om 20:21 heeft Joe MacDonald <Joe.MacDonald@windriver.com> het volgende geschreven:
> >> 
> >>> [Re: [oe] [meta-networking][meta-oe][PATCH 1/2] python-m2crypto: add 0.21.1] On 13.04.01 (Mon 20:15) Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Op 1 apr. 2013, om 20:13 heeft Joe MacDonald <Joe.MacDonald@windriver.com> het volgende geschreven:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Hey Koen,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> [[oe] [meta-networking][meta-oe][PATCH 1/2] python-m2crypto: add 0.21.1] On 13.03.29 (Fri 15:25) Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> ...y-link-in-sysroot-not-in-host-directories.patch | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>> .../python/python-m2crypto_0.21.1.bb               | 19 +++++++++++
> >>>>>> 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
> >>>>>> create mode 100644 meta-oe/recipes-devtools/python/python-m2crypto/0001-setup.py-link-in-sysroot-not-in-host-directories.patch
> >>>>>> create mode 100644 meta-oe/recipes-devtools/python/python-m2crypto_0.21.1.bb
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/python/python-m2crypto/0001-setup.py-link-in-sysroot-not-in-host-directories.patch b/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/python/python-m2crypto/0001-setup.py-link-in-sysroot-not-in-host-directories.patch
> >>>>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>>>> index 0000000..bcbdf24
> >>>>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>>>> +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/python/python-m2crypto/0001-setup.py-link-in-sysroot-not-in-host-directories.patch
> >>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
> >>>>>> +From f11b9c71080513f9b867ba8f40613ba2ebc6e960 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >>>>>> +From: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
> >>>>>> +Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:17:17 +0100
> >>>>>> +Subject: [PATCH] setup.py: link in sysroot, not in host directories
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +Upstream-status: Unknown
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Does this mean you haven't determined if it should be sent upstream yet,
> >>>>> or you did and it's gone off into an apparent black hole of a mailing
> >>>>> list somewhere?
> >>>> 
> >>>> The former
> >>> 
> >>> Okay.  Isn't that normally 'Pending' then?  I can make that tweak in my
> >>> merge, but I wanted to confirm I had the right information there first.
> >> 
> >> If you think 'Pending' reflects the status better than 'Unknown', go for it, but 'Pending' has been the catch-all for Upstream-status fields, so anytime you see 'Pending' you know you can't trust the Upstream-status field. 
> > 
> > Yeah, certainly no argument here, 'Pending' implies something to me that
> > simply isn't so based both on experience and the strict definition on
> > the website.  But that does seem to fit the definition reasonably well.
> > 
> > So since the meta-networking bit depends on the meta-oe bit being
> > merged, do you want me to merge both at the same time?  Or if you would
> > prefer to do the merge, I'm happy with the meta-networking piece of
> > this, so feel free.
> 
> Feel free to merge both

Okay, all done.

-- 
-Joe MacDonald.
:wq

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]