From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [216.145.245.199] (helo=mx03.dls.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lkrd6-0005jf-CI for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Sat, 21 Mar 2009 04:12:12 +0100 Received: from [209.242.7.134] (helo=[192.168.231.111]) by mx03.dls.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lkrc0-00009i-TA for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2009 22:11:05 -0500 Message-ID: <49C45ABD.2090603@dls.net> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 22:10:53 -0500 From: "Mike (mwester)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090302 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org References: <49C2BAEA.8050205@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <49C2BAEA.8050205@gmx.net> Subject: Re: RFC: extension of policy on removing recipes 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: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 03:12:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Schuster wrote: > Hi, > the latest removal of the automake-native version just hit me today (I > am not building chinook-compat regularly and I am basically the only > person building it at all). You're not at all alone on this. It clobbered SlugOS as well. The issue is that the autobuilders all built automake a looooooong time ago, and until someone tries a build from an empty TMPDIR, this problem won't be discovered. There may be a few more folks who have yet to discover that their builds will fail! > What I found surprising is, that automake 1.10 was deleted although it > was explicitly stated as PREFERRED_VERSION in the chinook-compat.conf. I > was under the impression that we already discussed that if you remove > something that is obviously being used, that patch is posted for RFC first. Yep, agree. Mike (mwester)