Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
To: Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] oe-setup-builddir: remove unreachable code, update comments
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 10:58:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DDD433F.4090009@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DDCA269.1030006@linux.intel.com>



On 05/24/2011 11:32 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 05/24/2011 03:31 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>> From: Darren Hart<dvhart@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> The following changes since commit 32a4e746273c3c7d3dd0f13b745bc0679cadaa44:
>>
>>    codeparser.py: fix syntax error in exception handling (2011-05-24 17:16:47 +0100)
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>    git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib.git dvhart/build
>>    http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=dvhart/build
>>
>> Darren Hart (1):
>>    oe-setup-builddir: remove unreachable code, update comments
>>
>>   scripts/create-pull-request |    2 +-
>>   scripts/oe-setup-builddir   |   32 +++++++++++++-------------------
>>   2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>>
> If this is intended for oe-core, please rebase to oe-core and resend, I 
> had a merge issue and want to make sure I am getting the right code 
> committed.


Gah, right. I saw the oe- in the script name and just had oe-core in my
head. Apologies. The two scripts are slightly different in the two
repositories, but both suffer from the same unreachable code problem.

Would you prefer I send two patches, one for each repository, or that I
push to one or the other and let you handle the merge process as part of
the regular sync up process (whatever that is).

Before I do that - are people in agreement with the approach? ie Should
I be removing the unreachable code or should I instead making it usable
again, reestablishing the functionality of OELOCALCONF and OELAYERSCONF?

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel



  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-25 18:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-24 22:31 [PATCH 0/1] oe-setup-builddir: remove unreachable code, update comments Darren Hart
2011-05-24 22:31 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Darren Hart
2011-05-24 22:35   ` Darren Hart
2011-05-25  6:32 ` [PATCH 0/1] " Saul Wold
2011-05-25 17:58   ` Darren Hart [this message]
2011-05-25 21:49     ` Saul Wold
2011-05-25 22:38       ` Richard Purdie
2011-05-25 23:39         ` Darren Hart

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4DDD433F.4090009@linux.intel.com \
    --to=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=sgw@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox