From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from atl4mhfb03.myregisteredsite.com ([209.17.115.61]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U9BjV-0005ap-8t for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 10:49:31 +0100 Received: from atl4mhob13.myregisteredsite.com (atl4mhob13.myregisteredsite.com [209.17.115.51]) by atl4mhfb03.myregisteredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1N9XFje002109 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 04:33:15 -0500 Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by atl4mhob13.myregisteredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1N9XDHd001246 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 04:33:13 -0500 Received: (qmail 18068 invoked by uid 0); 23 Feb 2013 09:33:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.14?) (mike@milosoftware.com@85.150.144.104) by 0 with ESMTPA; 23 Feb 2013 09:33:12 -0000 Message-ID: <51288CD7.2070800@topic.nl> Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 10:33:11 +0100 From: Mike Looijmans Organization: Topic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Burton, Ross" References: <51271A2A.6070604@topic.nl> In-Reply-To: Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [CONSOLIDATED PULL 00/41] Selected Updates and fixes X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 09:49:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/22/2013 10:52 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 22 February 2013 07:11, Mike Looijmans wrote: >> If there's anything I can do to help let me know. Is this now blocking the >> integration? >> >> I haven't found any issues with the dependencies, but I've only tested with >> the util-linux-mount/umount pacakges, and the sfdisk package (which does not >> depend on libmount). > > Can you verify that util-linux-fsck is no longer depending on > util-linux with this patch? Maybe I've got a confused build area. This is what opkg reports on my running systems, with the libmount patch applied, looks fine to me, a few require libmount1, and none require util-linux itself. For example: Package: util-linux-mount Version: 2.22.2-r1 Depends: libmount1 (>= 2.22.2), update-alternatives-cworth, libc6 (>= 2.17) Package: util-linux-fdisk Version: 2.22.2-r1 Depends: update-alternatives-cworth, libblkid1 (>= 2.22.2), libc6 (>= 2.17) Package: util-linux-fsck Version: 2.22.2-r1 Depends: libmount1 (>= 2.22.2), update-alternatives-cworth, libblkid1 (>= 2.22.2), libc6 (>= 2.17) -- Mike Looijmans - Topic Automation