From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QZSgG-0003c5-ON for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:01:40 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5MIw79S007792 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:58:07 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07688-02 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:58:04 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p5MIvxsY007786 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:57:59 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <1308758709.21613.104.camel@phil-desktop> References: <1308758420.20015.82.camel@rex> <1308758709.21613.104.camel@phil-desktop> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:57:40 +0100 Message-ID: <1308769060.20015.97.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] Change gcc 4.6 recipes to use svn in SRC_URI X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:01:40 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:05 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:00 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote: > > I'm afraid I don't like having "gcc 4.6" being so publicly visible. Its > > fine for the recipe names but the PV itself really needs to be something > > like "4.6.2+svn". > > Well, er, gcc 4.6.1 hasn't even been released yet. I think "4.6.0 > +svn" (or just "4.6+svn") is the only reasonable thing to put there. > Calling it 4.6.2 would definitely be misleading. I'm just thinking ahead ;-) Cheers, Richard