Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg 0.1.8: respect to the arch when choose the alternatives

[Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>]

On 05/31/2012 11:01 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 31 mei 2012, om 16:13 heeft Robert Yang het volgende geschreven:
>
>> There is a bug if we:
>> 1) bitbake core-image-sato-sdk MACHINE=qemux86
>> 2) bitbake core-image-sato with MACHINE=crownbay
>>
>> Then several pkgs in deploy/ipk/i586 would be installed to crownbay's
>> image even if there is one in deploy/ipk/core2 and we have set the
>> core2's priority higher than i586, when the version in deploy/ipk/i586 is
>> higher. This doesn't work for us, for example, what the crownbay need is
>> xserver-xorg-1.9.3, but it installs xserver-xorg-1.11.2.
>
> And this is working exactly as intended. Don't break opkg because your hardware driver situation sucks.
>

Hi Koen,

Thanks for your great patient on this patch:-), I'm afraid that this is
not working exactly as intended, since the rpm or dpkg doesn't have this
issue. (I have fixed other issue for rpm, but not the same as this one,
the xserver-xorg-1.9.3.rpm had installed correctly before the fix for rpm).
and dpkg works well without any fix.

I'm also glad that if we won't fix it.

// Robert


> So: NAK on this patch.
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>