On 08/19/2015 10:21 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Burton, Ross <ross.bur...@intel.com> wrote: >> >> On 17 August 2015 at 16:41, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> There are many reasons, for me its overlay support for systemd-nspawn, >>> networkd has got many new features that is now usable w.r.t. IP forwarding, >>> vxlan etc. >>> and it has many bug fixed in those 2000 odd commits since 219, no >>> different then any other package upgrades we do in general it keep the >>> upgrade workload lower as we roll the releases. >>> Any specific concerns ? >> >> >> Can we get an updated patch with a clearer commit log?
I've also heard that as systemd evolves, more binaries are getting added to the base package that should be packaged separately for people interested in small images. I do not have personal experience here, but wanted to pass along the feedback. We should look at buildhistory packaging differences when we do upgrades. Philip > > sent a v2 with more descriptions >> >> My concerns with the systemd upgrade were simply that until now we were >> tracking the systemd-stable repository. > > it was only in last release that it was switched to use stable > repository in hope that it will help > backporting to 1.8 release any future updates done on 219 easily. We > never were pinned to stable release > it just was a coincidence that 219 was right in time for 1.8 release. > We want to avoid situations where core recipes > from oe-core are overridden in other layers and staying latest helps that. > > If we want to change that policy to >> the latest release, that's fine by me. >> >> Anyone else have an opinion here? >> >> Ross -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
