On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 10:49:51AM +0100, Tixy wrote:
> > No, were using two different methods to produce configs. The one I use
> > produces a Thumb2 kernel, the one you use doesn't.
>
> Well, it seems we have a few different problems here:
>
> Certainly
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 20:29:38 -0500, Kate Stewart
wrote:
> This is a format that can go outside the packages (as well as in), so
> can be used without marshalling the entire Debian community to adopt it.
> So, am not advocating it be pushed by Linaro engineering for adoption
> inside Debian packag
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:26:20 -0300, Christian Robottom Reis
wrote:
> However, thinking a bit further, it would be nice to have a reference to
> both the final branch (which the package was generated from) and the
> original, sans-packaging branch which the packaging branch added to.
> However, doe
be
> great to have for debugging reasons, but I guess it's available in the
> packaging?
Yeah, they have a version number. Whether that's meaningful or not is up
to the packager.
We now produce files like
http://snapshots.linaro.org/11.05-daily/linaro-hwpacks/omap3/201
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:28:10 -0300, Christian Robottom Reis
wrote:
> > One very cheap thing we could do is to produce a report when building
> > the hwpack that tells you which archive each binary package that was
> > used came from. You can sort of do this now (assuming there aren't
> > clashing
Original: https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/Android/Meetings/2011-06-08
== Zach Pfeffer ==
=== Highlights ===
* Interviewed potential Android candidates
* Worked together with John Stultz and Andy Green to get Linaro's
kernel on the Panada-LEB
* Started Snowball planning and preliminary work
Hello linaro-dev,
One "stupid question" I've been having for a long time is why Google
for Android tree management put up a "repo" tool instead of using
git submodules. One reason why can think of is that git submodules
weren't available in 2008, but I wondered if there're more history
behind it.
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011, Bradley Powers wrote:
> This indicates that ROS can't determine the OS. I suspect that this is
> because Linaro calls itself Linaro, not Ubuntu (which is what the image
> is). Any ideas on how to get Linaro to call itself Ubuntu, or to get
> ROS to understand that Linaro mea
On 06/07/2011 11:04 AM, John Rigby wrote:
> Can you enter a bug for this so I don't forget to make these =y if
> that is all it takes to fix this.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux-linaro/+bug/794134
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.or
Can you enter a bug for this so I don't forget to make these =y if
that is all it takes to fix this.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Andy Doan wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 10:44 AM, John Rigby wrote:
>> I intend to make this better this cycle. The various flavours will be more
>> consistent with one a
On 06/07/2011 10:44 AM, John Rigby wrote:
> I intend to make this better this cycle. The various flavours will be more
> consistent with one another and the configs will be much leaner. Also I have
> found that one can successfully boot test a kernel with only "make uImage"
> so you don't have to
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 11:31:51AM +0100, Andy Green wrote:
>> On 06/07/2011 10:58 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>>
>> Hi -
>>
>> >>It was the output produced by running the commands listed at
>> >>https://wiki.linaro.org/Resour
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:33:27PM +0200, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote:
>> One of the things it does not capture currently is kernel
>> configuration. Assuming you can cat /proc/config it would be easy to
>> capture that as well but I woul
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:59:32AM -0500, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
> On 6 June 2011 13:40, James Westby wrote:
> > Hi Zach,
> >
> > In addition I realised that some of the information requested isn't
> > explicit in what you propose.
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 16:59:46 -0500, Zach Pfeffer
> > wrote:
On 6 June 2011 13:40, James Westby wrote:
> Hi Zach,
>
> In addition I realised that some of the information requested isn't
> explicit in what you propose.
>
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 16:59:46 -0500, Zach Pfeffer
> wrote:
>> I went through Kiko's request:
>>
>> - What kernel tree it was built fro
[ rosmake ] Packages requested are: ['ros',
'ros_comm']
[ rosmake ] Logging to
directory/home/gumros/.ros/rosmake/rosmake_output-20110607-003053
[ rosmake ] Expanded args ['ros', &
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 08:48:31AM +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> At least for the config,
>
> CONFIG_IKCONFIG=y
> CONFIG_IKCONFIG_PROC=y
Is this not used everywhere, and if not, why not?
--
Christian Robottom Reis | [+55 16] 3376 0125 | http://launchpad.net/~kiko
Canonical Ltd.| [+5
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:21:14PM -0400, James Westby wrote:
> I don't think we should be looking to attribute the provenance of every
> line of source that ends up in the hwpack in one report, we just need to
> shorten the chain to find the information that you care about.
That is a very good po
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:33:27PM +0200, Zygmunt Krynicki wrote:
> One of the things it does not capture currently is kernel
> configuration. Assuming you can cat /proc/config it would be easy to
> capture that as well but I would like to know what others think.
James has rightly pointed out that
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:13:40PM -0400, James Westby wrote:
> Luckily I missed that call, I have no confusion and this sounds
> perfectly sensible to me :-)
Though now I'm stuck with a confusing Subject line to compensate :-/
> The config is available in /boot isn't it?
Good point.
> As for w
During our last IRC meeting we decided to change the usual time and
date for our weekly IRC meetings, to avoid conflict with the ARM
porting jam.
The meeting will now happen on every Thursday at 14UTC, and it should
take 1 hour.
The calendar for this week is already pointing the new date at
https
On Sunday 05 June 2011, Dirk Behme wrote:
> after Nicolas' announcement of linaro-2.6.39 [1] I had a look to the
> bsp/freescale/linux-linaro-natty.git lt-2.6.38 kernel [2] what has to
> be done to port that to 2.6.39.
>
> Looking at that lt-2.6.38 branch, I exported 184 patches [3] which
> see
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 11:31:51AM +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 10:58 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
> Hi -
>
> >>It was the output produced by running the commands listed at
> >>https://wiki.linaro.org/Resources/HowTo/KernelDeploy#From_Linaro_sources
> >>
> >>This c
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 10:01:48AM +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 09:35 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
> >>>Disabling Thumb2 fixes the problem.
> >>
> >>What did you actually disable? Presumably not CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL so
> >>the thumb support at all?
> >
> >I deselec
On 06/07/2011 10:58 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
Hi -
It was the output produced by running the commands listed at
https://wiki.linaro.org/Resources/HowTo/KernelDeploy#From_Linaro_sources
This config has CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL=y and doesn't have an entry for
CONFIG_CPU_V6
Wel
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 10:49:51AM +0100, Tixy wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 10:01 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> > On 06/07/2011 09:35 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> >
> > >>> Disabling Thumb2 fixes the problem.
> > >>
> > >> What did you actually disable? Presumably not CONFIG_TH
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 10:01 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 09:35 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
> >>> Disabling Thumb2 fixes the problem.
> >>
> >> What did you actually disable? Presumably not CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL so
> >> the thumb support at all?
> >
> > I deselected
On 06/07/2011 09:35 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
Disabling Thumb2 fixes the problem.
What did you actually disable? Presumably not CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL so
the thumb support at all?
I deselected CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL using menuconfig, which changed
the .config file like...
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 09:22 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 09:09 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
> Hi -
>
> >>> When booted on a Beagleboard-xM, the resulting kernel appears to hang
> >>> after "Starting kernel...". I haven't investigated any further.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Tr
On 06/07/2011 09:09 AM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
Hi -
When booted on a Beagleboard-xM, the resulting kernel appears to hang
after "Starting kernel...". I haven't investigated any further.
Try disabling CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL and rebuilding.
If this does fix the problem, this
On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 17:44 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Tixy wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 01:12 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >> Time to leave 2.6.38 behind and move on! We now have a 2.6.39 based
> >> Linaro kernel which can be viewed here:
> >>
> >> http://
On 1 June 2011 16:30, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 31 May 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
>
>> Return error in case of pending IRQ but none functions bits
>> in CCCR_INTx is set.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Per Forlin
>> ---
>> drivers/mmc/core/sdio_irq.c | 5 +
>> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0
32 matches
Mail list logo
