Re: release-2010 - last moment hot fixes

[Graeme Gregory <dp@xora.org.uk>]

On 01/12/2010 08:54, Graham Gower wrote:
> On 1 December 2010 19:21, Frans Meulenbroeks
> <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2010/12/1 Petr Štetiar <ynezz@true.cz>:
>>> Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> [2010-11-30 10:12:08]:
>>>
>>>> Do we already have some resolutions to these issues ? are there
>>>> existing patches
>>> Yes, there are few patches around, but Koen didn't told us yet[1] what
>>> fix/workaround he would preffer for Angstrom 2008/2010.
>>>
>>> 1. http://www.mail-archive.com/openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org/msg13494.html
>>>
>>> -- ynezz
>> OE is more than angstrom, and no single distro should  block progress
>> for the rest, even not if it is the primary distro.
>> My suggestion would be to upgrade uclibc + binutils. to fix things.
>> Angstrom then can (and probably already does) pin the current versions.
>>
>> My 2 cents, Frans.
>>
> The alternative is remove uclibc bits from the angstrom distro conf,
> removing all doubt about its current status as unsupported/nonworking.
>
>
Wait a minute here, all the reports I keep seeing are a failure to
compile in 3 non essential tools. I think as Angstrom maintainer Im
quite happy for that state to exist in a release. I know I wouldnt be
using OpenGL and h264 video on a uclibc target.

Graeme