package/ccache: bump version to 3.1.11
PATCH 1/1 package/ccache: bump version to 3.1.11
--- package/ccache/ccache.mk | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
package/ccache/ccache.mk +1 -1
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ # ################################################################################ -CCACHE_VERSION = 3.1.8 +CCACHE_VERSION = 3.1.11 CCACHE_SITE = http://samba.org/ftp/ccache CCACHE_SOURCE = ccache-$(CCACHE_VERSION).tar.xz CCACHE_LICENSE = GPLv3+, others
Signature · 1 line
1.7.10.4
PATCH 1/1 package/ccache: bump version to 3.1.11
Hi all,
based on the release notes at ccache.samba.org, there are only bugfix releases since 3.1.x (hence the above patch should be safe to apply), but the 3.2.x line are already exists. Should we start moving on to that major version?
Regards,
Karoly
package/ccache/ccache.mk line 7
Quoted 3 lines
package/ccache/ccache.mk +1
-1-CCACHE_VERSION = 3.1.8 +CCACHE_VERSION = 3.1.11
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20150329/8036e84a/attachment.html>
Thomas Petazzoni
AppliedPATCH 1/1 package/ccache: bump version to 3.1.11
In reply to Karoly KaszaDear Karoly Kasza,
Quoted 5 lines · Karoly Kasza
Signed-off-by Karoly Kasza <[email protected]>--- package/ccache/ccache.mk | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Applied, thanks. If you feel like it, sending a patch adding a hash file would be good.
Also, there is still quite a lot of things to fix to get our ccache support to a sane state. If you have some time, you could look at
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/287383/, especially the comments made by Arnout, and try to improve the ccache support based on that.
Thanks a lot!
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com