On Fri, Jan 21, 2011, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> I'm curious to hear what packaging methods would be used for things like
> the toolchain which have consumers beyond ubuntu. Are we saying this
> will only be Ubuntu packages or is there consensus around providing
> static tarballs ?
For output
On 21 January 2011 13:22, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
> I'm curious to hear what packaging methods would be used for things like
> the toolchain which have consumers beyond ubuntu. Are we saying this
> will only be Ubuntu packages or is there consensus around providing
> static tarballs ?
>
> I as
> Agreed. I'd like an easy way of getting pre-built binaries of all the
> stable enough Linaro outputs. On the toolchain side this would
> include the latest monthly releases of Linaro GCC, GDB, and QEMU in
> native and cross versions as appropriate. A single PPA for the whole
> of Linaro would
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
> - the overlay ppa is the only one that should be enabled for Linaro release
>images
[...]
I like the clear limits you're setting to the overlay PPA (rejecting
any other concurrent overlays)
> As for the 'tools' ppa, I had envisioned this as the
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Steve Langasek
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:10:08AM +1300, Michael Hope wrote:
>> Agreed. I'd like an easy way of getting pre-built binaries of all the
>> stable enough Linaro outputs. On the toolchain side this would
>> include the latest monthly releases
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:10:08AM +1300, Michael Hope wrote:
> > To my mind the important constraint is that there should be some
> > relatively easy thing
> > that we can say to someone 'and this is how you get a stable Linaro';
> > and by that I mean the whole
> > thing - a set of tools that bui
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 07:30:35PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> As a followup to IRC conversations around backports, releases and QA
> today, I'd like to hear what others think of our Linaro PPAs. I'll
> start with some history and proposals:
> We created a fairly ad hoc PPA layout for the 10
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:44 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
> On 20 January 2011 18:30, Loïc Minier wrote:
>> Hey
>>
>> As a followup to IRC conversations around backports, releases and QA
>> today, I'd like to hear what others think of our Linaro PPAs. I'll
>> start with some history and pr
On 20 January 2011 18:30, Loïc Minier wrote:
> Hey
>
> As a followup to IRC conversations around backports, releases and QA
> today, I'd like to hear what others think of our Linaro PPAs. I'll
> start with some history and proposals:
To my mind the important constraint is that there sh
Hey
As a followup to IRC conversations around backports, releases and QA
today, I'd like to hear what others think of our Linaro PPAs. I'll
start with some history and proposals:
We created a fairly ad hoc PPA layout for the 10.11 cycle, with
ppa:linaro-maintainers/tools
ppa
10 matches
Mail list logo
