From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T7V16-0005ya-S4 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 19:28:25 +0200 Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Aug 2012 10:16:06 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,348,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="187677200" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.12.251]) ([10.255.12.251]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Aug 2012 10:16:06 -0700 Message-ID: <5040F156.2030609@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:16:06 -0700 From: Saul Wold User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_Stenberg?= References: <1346422229-61628-1-git-send-email-bjst@enea.com> <1346422229-61628-3-git-send-email-bjst@enea.com> <5040D8FE.3050506@linux.intel.com> <20120831170105.GA25179@giant> In-Reply-To: <20120831170105.GA25179@giant> Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Enable bash-ptest X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 17:28:25 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 08/31/2012 10:01 AM, Björn Stenberg wrote: > Saul Wold wrote: >> You new patches still need patch headers with Upstream-Status and >> Signed-off-by tags. > > Ouch, sorry about that. I added Signed-off but forgot upstream. I'll be more careful next time. > Just to be clear these need to be in your busybox patches not the commit message for the overall patch to OE-Core, I hope that makes sense. In these two files: meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash-4.2/build-tests.patch meta/recipes-extended/bash/bash-4.2/test-output.patch >> Should this be a DISTRO or IMAGE FEATURE? I can see potential >> arguments for both sides, what was your thinking on choosing IMAGE >> over DISTRO? > > I chose IMAGE since that is how the -dbg and -dev package groups are enabled, and -ptest is modeled after them. Also we have the EXTRA_IMAGE_FEATURES setting that can be used to enable this temporarily while I don't know if we have anything similar for DISTRO_FEATURES? > That makes sense also, I was thinking along the same lines, just wanted to get your reasoning captured. Thanks Sau!