On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 04:41:34PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Maxime Roussin-Bélanger > <maxime.roussinbelan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > CMake does not define the `find_host_program` command we've > > been using in the cross-compiling code path. It was > > provided by a widely used Android toolchain file. For > > compatibility, continue to use `find_host_program` if > > available, but otherwise use just `find_program`. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Roussin-Bélanger <maxime.roussinbelan...@gmail.com> > > It sounds fine to me; the backward compatibility is maintained and it > fixes a real use-case so I see no reason to not apply EXCEPT: > > - lack of Upstream-Status field > - lack of upstream bug about the issue, ideally the proposed patch > should be send to upstream so we can drop it in next releases >
I just got r/w access to the poky-contrib repository. Do I have to create a pull-request/send-pull-request to get an upstream-status field? Can we ignore this email and just use the pull-request script instead? If so, do I have to resend the same patch (V2 ?) to the same recipients? If not, how do I get an upstream-status? I just pushed my branch to contrib repository (mroussin/fix_cmake_find_cuda_not_android), does that mean pending? > -- > Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems > http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br > Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
