On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 09:03 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Marinescu, Bogdan A > <bogdan.a.marine...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Why is recipe renamed > > > > Wasn't I supposed to do that when I upgraded the package from 3.4 to 3.4.3 ? > > No one replied to my other question (or at least no one replied that I > noticed), about > why we even bothered to bump it to 3.4.3 ... > > I have the same elements in that question .. but from a different angle.
I think Khem's question is a little vague and I'm not sure how I'd answer that. As for policy of updating the kernel headers against stable releases, it can't hurt and we needed to bump PV or PR anyway as Martin mentioned so that was the main reason I took the patch. I think there could be a perception issue if we don't update, on the other hand it could be considered unnecessary churn. So I think in future this will be on a case by case basis. If there was a header fix in the stable series (which is conceivable), we would want to take that for example. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
