From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TBPps-0008Ly-2A for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:45:00 +0200 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q8BCWQ4A006768 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:32:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.146.67] (128.224.146.67) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.309.2; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:32:26 -0700 Message-ID: <504F2F50.6010903@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 08:32:16 -0400 From: Bruce Ashfield User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: , References: <20120911045038.GE2980@sakrah.homelinux.org> <504EC385.6060008@windriver.com> <20120911045557.GF2980@sakrah.homelinux.org> <504EC4F3.30705@windriver.com> <20120911051602.GA3035@sakrah.homelinux.org> <504EC96B.7090205@windriver.com> <20120911052205.GC3035@sakrah.homelinux.org> In-Reply-To: <20120911052205.GC3035@sakrah.homelinux.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] linux-yocto/3.4: v3.4.10 and uprobes/kprobes configuration updates 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: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 12:45:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12-09-11 01:22 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > On (11/09/12 01:17), Bruce Ashfield wrote: >> On 12-09-11 1:16 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>> On (11/09/12 00:58), Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>> On 12-09-11 12:55 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>>>> On (11/09/12 00:52), Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>>>> On 12-09-11 12:50 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>>>>>> On (10/09/12 14:11), Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>>>>>>> Updating to 3.4.10 which has been soaking for a bit now, as well >>>>>>>> as picking up the following meta commits from Tom Z: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> would it also need bumping linux-libc-headers too ? >>>>>> >>>>>> There's no new interfaces in the -stable updates, so there's no reason >>>>>> to bump. I typically elect to jump to a 3.x.0 and leave it there, but >>>>>> we had an interim bump that I wouldn't have done .. so we sit at 3.4.3 >>>>>> at the moment (which is still fine). >>>>> >>>>> OK. Next question is, do stable updates get changes such that we need to >>>>> bump the linux-libc-headers ? >>>> >>>> Not that I've ever seen. >>> >>> OK thats what I was expecting to hear >>> so in theory if we always pin linux-libc-headers to major release we are >>> good. say 3.4.0 and then 3.6.0 and so on we really dont need 3.4.1 or >>> later and similarly for other versions. In this case we only bump >>> the linux-libc-headers recipe when we add a new major kernel release >> >> Correct. If you check the mailing list archives, I was a bit surprised >> to see it go to 3.4.3, but going forward, expect to only see major rev >> bumps. > > yes essentually IIRC I mentioned that recipe should be called > blah_3.4.bb and blah_3.6.bb and so on and not really blah_3.4.x etc. > OK I am glad we are on same page boundary here :) Agreed. We are in sync. Bruce