On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Phil Blundell <p...@pbcl.net> wrote: > Ping?
Both changes are fine. change from being machine specific is futuristic it will not work for all architectures that uclibc supports but is sufficient for what we support/use in oe for now. Acked-by: Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> > > p. > > On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 12:55 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: >> There is no good reason for uclibc to be machine specific. Remove local >> assignment to PACKAGE_ARCH so that it gets the default target >> architecture and bump PR for that change. >> >> See >> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2011-May/003064.html >> >> Also replace a chunk of anonymous python with a COMPATIBLE_HOST >> declaration. >> >> Signed-off-by: Phil Blundell <ph...@gnu.org> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core > _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
