From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UPYBW-0005TY-1q for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 15:02:12 +0200 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r39CiaaT026823 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 9 Apr 2013 05:44:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.146.59] (128.224.146.59) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.342.3; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 05:44:36 -0700 Message-ID: <51640D33.1000703@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 08:44:35 -0400 From: Michel Thebeau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Purdie References: <1365454473.12407.51.camel@ted> <1365456279-30162-1-git-send-email-michel.thebeau@windriver.com> <51633682.2030305@windriver.com> <1365457704.12407.63.camel@ted> In-Reply-To: <1365457704.12407.63.camel@ted> Cc: Bruce.Ashfield@windriver.com, openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kernel.bbclass: do_strip: allow recipes to strip the kernel 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, 09 Apr 2013 13:02:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 13-04-08 05:48 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 17:28 -0400, Michel Thebeau wrote: >> >> On 13-04-08 05:24 PM, michel.thebeau@windriver.com wrote: >>> From: Michel Thebeau >>> >>> Allow recipes to specify sections to be stripped from the kernel output >>> using KERNEL_IMAGE_STRIP. For example: >>> >>> KERNEL_IMAGE_STRIP = ".comment .unwanted" >> >> s/KERNEL_IMAGE_STRIP/KERNEL_IMAGE_STRIP_EXTRA_SECTIONS >> >> Throughout > > So are you resending this with the appropriate changes, tested? It looks > much better this way to me than the first version anyway, thanks. > Yes, I will update this patch to address the same comments given for the first version and retest before sending it out. Thanks Richard, M > Richard > > >