Heads Up: Bitbake minimum version change imminent
I just wanted to let people know that we have a minimum version of bitbake change imminent for OE-Core.
I've already pushed the changes we need to bitbake for umask, shared work directory and multilib and updated its version to 1.13.2. I'm planning to merge patches to OE-Core which depend on these changes later this week (and bump the minimum version OE-Core requires at the same time).
In case it isn't clear, I've been batching things up to try and ensure we only have to do this once for a variety of improvements :)
Cheers,
Richard
Quoted 11 lines · Richard Purdie
I just wanted to let people know that we have a minimum version of bitbake change imminent for OE-Core.
I've already pushed the changes we need to bitbake for umask, shared work directory and multilib and updated its version to 1.13.2. I'm planning to merge patches to OE-Core which depend on these changes later this week (and bump the minimum version OE-Core requires at the same time).
In case it isn't clear, I've been batching things up to try and ensure we only have to do this once for a variety of improvements :)
I have to say that it's *extremely* unintuitive to have a minimum version requirement on a version that hasn't even been tagged in the git repository. If it's good enough to depend on, it should be good enough to consider released.
Signature · 5 lines
Christopher Larson clarson at kergoth dot com Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus Maintainer - Tslib Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics
Quoted 11 lines · Chris Larson
Quoted 9 lines · Richard Purdie
I just wanted to let people know that we have a minimum version of bitbake change imminent for OE-Core.
I've already pushed the changes we need to bitbake for umask, shared work directory and multilib and updated its version to 1.13.2. I'm planning to merge patches to OE-Core which depend on these changes later this week (and bump the minimum version OE-Core requires at the same time).
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
In case it isn't clear, I've been batching things up to try and ensure we only have to do this once for a variety of improvements :)
I have to say that it's *extremely* unintuitive to have a minimum version requirement on a version that hasn't even been tagged in the git repository. If it's good enough to depend on, it should be good enough to consider released.
Agreed and I did add the tags.
Cheers,
Richard