On 09/29/2011 11:38 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 18:28 +0000, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Richard Purdie
<richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 23:20 -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote:
From: Tom Rini<tom_r...@mentor.com>
At issue is that route/pktloc.c (not generated) depends on
route/pktloc_syntax.h (generated).
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini<tom_r...@mentor.com>
---
.../libnl/fix-pktloc_syntax_h-race.patch | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++
meta/recipes-support/libnl/libnl_2.0.bb | 3 +-
2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 meta/recipes-support/libnl/fix-pktloc_syntax_h-race.patch
diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/libnl/fix-pktloc_syntax_h-race.patch
b/meta/recipes-support/libnl/fix-pktloc_syntax_h-race.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d396f96
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta/recipes-support/libnl/fix-pktloc_syntax_h-race.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+---
Missing patch header...
How would I mark this when this is an old version of libnl and it
appears not to be a problem the latest version of libnl?
I don't have the patch status field entries handy but you can certainly
document that the issue isn't present in version X so its likely been
fixed upstream already. I guess "Inappropriate" would cover that if
nothing else does.
Just for reference:
http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines
This contains the Upstream-Status: entries.
Thanks
Sau!
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
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
