From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ni5nI-0005P3-6v for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:47:51 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ni5ki-0001Bp-FE for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:45:08 +0100 Received: from p5b3b3914.dip.t-dialin.net ([91.59.57.20]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:45:08 +0100 Received: from no2spam by p5b3b3914.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:45:08 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Rolf Leggewie Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:38:25 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p5b3b3914.dip.t-dialin.net User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) In-Reply-To: Sender: news X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.12 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxtogo.org); Unknown failure Subject: Re: {RFC] console-image.bb 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: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:47:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Koen Kooi wrote: > It hasn't suddenly appeared, and furthermore console-image is widely > used enough to label it 'core' nonsense, another of your ad-hoc rules BTW, why have you not replied to Mickey? What he quotes apparently was made an official rule (although the doc team was never asked to include it in the wiki AFAICT). It's always the same pattern with you. At least you're consistent in your inconsistency. > And non-angstrom people created angstrom-named new recipes without any > approval from angstrom developers is just plain rude. you're a nut case, plain and simple. First you complain about the name angstrom- being stripped from the recipe, then you complain about it being reintroduced and label that as "just plain rude" (since you're the expert on courtesy as we all know). I suggest you seek medical help.