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 1SKTOW-0008Ho-9a for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:49:56 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3IBeU54000945 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:40:30 +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 00502-03 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:40:26 +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 q3IBeO6p000939 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:40:25 +0100 Message-ID: <1334749226.24091.67.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:40:26 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4F8EA5CC.6010101@opendreambox.org> References: <4F847380.6000401@windriver.com> <4F8489DE.1050905@opendreambox.org> <4F8C24CB.3080607@opendreambox.org> <1334587325.616.4.camel@ted> <4F8C379A.3070903@opendreambox.org> <4F8C3B19.40400@windriver.com> <4F8EA5CC.6010101@opendreambox.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: MIPS vs MIPS32 tunings -- summary and questions 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, 18 Apr 2012 11:49:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 13:30 +0200, Andreas Oberritter wrote: > now, after having repacked all binary tarballs that had mipsel or > mipsel-nf in their name and contents, and after having changed all > occurrences of mipsel and mipsel-nf in my local recipes (where > appropriate), and after having rebuilt everything from scratch again, it > came to my attention that "mipsel" in PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS breaks opkg, > because no mipsel packages are being generated. That's what I told > before, right? How is this breaking opkg? We often have architectures listed in there for which there are no packages generated (all, noarch and any spring to mind)? Cheers, Richard