On Tuesday 09 June 2015 15:19:03 Mike Looijmans wrote:
> I think they both install the same header files and libs, so you cannot have
> them both on the same sysroot. Otherwise "opencv3" could be a package in
> its own right, and a single system might install them both.
>
> So I think yes we're st
I think they both install the same header files and libs, so you cannot have
them both on the same sysroot. Otherwise "opencv3" could be a package in its
own right, and a single system might install them both.
So I think yes we're stuck with a "preferred" version then.
M.
On 09-06-15 12:15,
And shall I give it a negative preference?
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
wrote:
> shall I leave both then?
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Mike Looijmans
> wrote:
>> OpenCV 3 is not backwards compatible, removing 2.x will break any recipe
>> currently using Open
shall I leave both then?
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Mike Looijmans wrote:
> OpenCV 3 is not backwards compatible, removing 2.x will break any recipe
> currently using OpenCV.
>
>
>
>
> On 09-06-15 12:07, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
>>
>> -Support for new PACKAGECONFIGS
>> -Merge with ope
OpenCV 3 is not backwards compatible, removing 2.x will break any recipe
currently using OpenCV.
On 09-06-15 12:07, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado wrote:
-Support for new PACKAGECONFIGS
-Merge with opencv-samples
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
---
.../recipes-support/opencv/opencv-sampl
-Support for new PACKAGECONFIGS
-Merge with opencv-samples
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
---
.../recipes-support/opencv/opencv-samples_2.4.bb | 39 ---
meta-oe/recipes-support/opencv/opencv_2.4.bb | 99
meta-oe/recipes-support/opencv/opencv_3.0.bb |
