From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JQ3Ac-0000Lg-I7 for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:12:26 +0100 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JQ3AL-0001Bk-8C for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:11:57 +0000 Received: from ip-62-143-227-114.1411n-cud12k-01.ish.de ([62.143.227.114]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:11:57 +0000 Received: from no2spam by ip-62-143-227-114.1411n-cud12k-01.ish.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:11:57 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Rolf Leggewie Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:11:47 +0100 Message-ID: References: <74d0deb30802140817g153c4fe3if16cd9eabe67c9f3@mail.gmail.com> <200802151245.30040.mickey@vanille-media.de> <47B5A9A4.3040400@dls.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-62-143-227-114.1411n-cud12k-01.ish.de User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) In-Reply-To: <47B5A9A4.3040400@dls.net> Sender: news X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on serenity X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:39:36 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: RFD: is bitbake 1.8.10 minimum supported standard? (was: [oe-commits] org.oe.dev anki: fix parse error) X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:12:27 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike (mwester) wrote: > Requiring a bitbake upgrade to accommodate a > single-line in a single recipe that can easily be expressed in a fashion > compatible with the existing bitbake versions installed, well that just > seem to fly in the face of that earlier discussion. Well, seen from that angle that seems to hold. But that was not my angle and I hope I was not being mistaken in this regard. IIRC bitbake 1.8.10 has quite many bug fixes as well (RP?). So, that is more what I was getting at. AFAIK, .dev and bitbake were meant to be closely coupled. IOW, don't run bleeding edge .dev with an old bitbake and expect things to work. I am open to extend the time until 1.8.8 is officially dead for .dev What do others think about this question of timing?