Re: [RFC]: Is MACHINE_TASK_PROVIDER still being used or should it be phased out?

[Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hans Henry von Tresckow schreef:
| (sorry for the repost, but I forgot the RFC tag the first time)
|
| I am trying to fix http://bugs.openembedded.net/show_bug.cgi?id=3969.
|
| I basicaly have two options here:
|
| 1) simply replace MACHINE_TASK_PROVIDER with task-base-extended in the
| affected recipie
|
| 2) come up with a different solution that preserves MACHINE_TASK_PROVIDER
| and adds a suitable definition
|
| It seems that a lot of recent image recipies have used approach #1 and
I was
| wondering if MACHINE_TASK_PROVIDER  was still actively being used or if it
| is mostly left over from the initial task-base switchover.

A while ago I decided for myself it's up to the person creating the
image recipe what to use. Recipes are cheap, so you could just create an
opie-vontres-image.bb and have it added to the autobuilder.

regards,

Koen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFH1ryeMkyGM64RGpERAtGXAKC2eD+cSjU+kxPwGKbTo9D7fnPHWwCgiqdg
4V+FO4Y7ohOEz8v2/TrBuq0=
=gNVi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----