From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.insigma.com.cn ([115.236.48.170] helo=WX-Edge.insigma.com.cn) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RQrws-0007uj-QP for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 03:43:35 +0100 Received: from WX-ExchMB.insigma.com.cn (10.0.1.203) by WX-Edge.insigma.com.cn (10.0.1.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.436.0; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:36:58 +0800 Received: from [192.168.0.98] (122.224.76.38) by WX-ExchMB.insigma.com.cn (10.0.1.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.240.5; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:36:57 +0800 Message-ID: <1321497356.1264.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> From: Ni Qingliang To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:35:56 +0800 In-Reply-To: <4EC47257.5030302@windriver.com> References: <4EAE0428.2020209@windriver.com> <4EC47257.5030302@windriver.com> Organization: Insigma X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Saul Wold Subject: Re: What is the strategy to update eglibc? X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: niqingliang@insigma.com.cn, 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: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:43:35 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable it looks like there is 2.14 bb file already, why the default eglibc stay on 2.13? On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 10:32 +0800, Kang Kai wrote: > On 2011=E5=B9=B411=E6=9C=8817=E6=97=A5 05:38, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Kang Kai wrot= e: > >> Hi Saul, > >> > >> I just want to update eglibc but eglibc is using its 2.14 branch and u= se svn > >> commit revision "15225" as current version. Of course it is behind the > >> latest svn revision, but I don't quit sure about which is the right re= vision > >> to update eglibc. >=20 > Hi Khem, > > since release branches of eglibc only get bug fixes in ideal case it > > should be good at any revision. However if we have bug > > fixes that dont affect us immediately we do not tend to update > > the revision. If you find that some bug fix thats applied upstream is > > needed it certainly can be a reason to bump up srcrev given we do some > > level of build and runtime testing > > with new revision. >=20 > Thanks very much for your detailed explanation. > I check the changelog of eglibc 2.13 branch(latest is 15508), and they > are some tiny updates except the revision 15226 that is same with > current patch >=20 > glibc_bug_fix_12454.patch >=20 > And I made the rough tests of image-sato of qemu-x86 and qemu-arm and > results are fine. >=20 > Regards, > Kai > > > >> Could you give me some guide? Thank you! > >> > >> Regards, > >> Kai > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Openembedded-core mailing list > >> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > >> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Openembedded-core mailing list > > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core --=20 Yi Qingliang niqingliang@insigma.com.cn https://niqingliang2003.wordpress.com