From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [216.145.245.197] (helo=mx01.dls.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lcmrg-0001Nz-4c for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:29:53 +0100 Received: from [209.242.7.188] (helo=[192.168.231.111]) by mx01.dls.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lclbw-0000Ex-0D for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:09:32 -0600 Message-ID: <49A6E8E3.6090007@dls.net> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:09:23 -0600 From: "Mike (mwester)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081209 Thunderbird/2.0.0.19 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org References: <49A6B938.3040201@balister.org> In-Reply-To: <49A6B938.3040201@balister.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] update opkg* SRCREV to 201 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, 26 Feb 2009 20:29:55 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Philip Balister wrote: > Koen Kooi wrote: >> On 25-02-09 21:46, Koen Kooi wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I was getting seriously annoyed with the useless error codes opkg was >>> giving me and Tick pointed me to: >>> >>> http://code.google.com/p/opkg/issues/detail?id=6&can=1 >>> >>> We're at 197 now in OE (with r201 applied as patch). I'd like to get >>> r199 and r200 in as well, and since I'm lazy I though we'd get r198 in >>> as well, which means instead of adding a few patches I can just bump up >>> SRCREV to 201. >>> >>> What do you think? >> >> Noone is thinking anything? > > Well, it looks ok to me, but I am not a follower of opkg. > > Hearing no positive comments, does anyone object to pushing this, > knowing that if Koen is wrong about this working, it messes up our builds? [I have failed -- I had intended to remain silent on the topic of opkg ;-) ] I use PREFERRED_VERSION, for a reason -- opkg has numerous issues, few of which seem to be well-understood much less being worked on, and it seems that small-memory devices trigger these issues more so than the larger more common systems. I will be back-porting these patches for the opkg-nogpg-nocurl recipe, regardless. If folks would rather not have the ever-growing set of opkg-nogpg-nocurl patches clutter up the opkg recipe directory, feel free to instruct me to move that all to a different directory. -Mike (mwester)