From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QjZxF-00054D-UG for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 18:49:02 +0200 Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2011 09:44:54 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,236,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="30287039" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.13.254]) ([10.255.13.254]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2011 09:44:54 -0700 Message-ID: <4E270605.1090802@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:44:53 -0700 From: Saul Wold User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110428 Fedora/3.1.10-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer References: <1311154909.30326.51.camel@phil-desktop> <4E26D87A.5020808@gmail.com> <1311172926.2344.49.camel@rex> In-Reply-To: <1311172926.2344.49.camel@rex> Subject: Re: libiconv checksum wrong 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, 20 Jul 2011 16:49:02 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 07/20/2011 07:42 AM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 16:26 +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote >> there is already patch sent to fix it. >> http://patches.openembedded.org/patch/7933/ >> libiconv is not default provider of virtual/libiconv on >> eglibc/glibc based systems and sometimes that can trip you >> over. It happens and as long as we find it and fix it quickly >> I don't see a problem. Do you ? >> Some people seem to think differently about this. I still recall the >> pile of shit Koen dumped upon me about a year ago when I accidentally >> removed a version of openssh or so that was still used. Even though >> the problem was fixed very quickly after it was brought to my >> attention. Ah well. As Orwell already said "all animals are equal but >> some animals are more equal than others". >> >> >> IMO we should not get so pedantic that people start getting >> scared of making changes >> >> It was by no means my intention to be pedantic. >> >> Then again I *do* think it is good practice if someone creates a new >> recipe that (s)he tests it before submitting it. >> >> And my impression was that one of the goals of YP and oe-core was to >> increase the quality level. >> One of the ways to increase quality is to do a build after pulling >> changes and before committing them. >> (at least I feel that is one of the ways to increase quality, and yes >> there are other ways too). >> >> And where people work, mistakes happen. One can accept that, but one >> can also see if there are ways to improve and avoid that a problem >> re-occurs. > > I think its fair to ask how this happened and it appears to be due to > PREFERRED_VERSION and/or PROVIDER confusion. Its unfortunate but I think > the people involved will not do it again :). > Yes, the lesson has been learned, I am working on adding a UCLIBC build into the mix, and the Autobuilder will have a vanilla oe-core build with both uclibc and egligc some time soon as well. Please chalk this up to live and learn not a common practice. Sau! > I don't think its entirely fair to immediately bring into question the > overall quality goals as we are continuing to work towards those and > this is an exception, not the norm. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >