On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Koen Kooi
>> wrote:
From what I read, those are backports; so you can use Backport
[applied in version X.Y]
>>>
>>> No, they were pulled of the powertop mailinglist and git-am'ed :)
>>
>> So it is p
Op 16 jul. 2012, om 15:34 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Koen Kooi
> wrote:
>>> From what I read, those are backports; so you can use Backport
>>> [applied in version X.Y]
>>
>> No, they were pulled of the powertop mailinglist and git-am'ed :
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> From what I read, those are backports; so you can use Backport
>> [applied in version X.Y]
>
> No, they were pulled of the powertop mailinglist and git-am'ed :)
So it is pending.
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-
Op 16 jul. 2012, om 14:28 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 15 jul. 2012, om 23:25 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Koen Kooi
>>> wrote:
The recipe is autotool
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 15 jul. 2012, om 23:25 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Koen Kooi
>> wrote:
>>> The recipe is autotools based now, the COPYING file was replaced with the
>>> complete GPLv2 license text.
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 13:25 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 16 jul. 2012, om 12:36 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
>
> > On Monday 16 July 2012 12:33:00 Koen Kooi wrote:
> >> Op 16 jul. 2012, om 10:47 heeft Burton, Ross het volgende geschreven:
> >>> On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi wro
Op 16 jul. 2012, om 12:36 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven:
> On Monday 16 July 2012 12:33:00 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Op 16 jul. 2012, om 10:47 heeft Burton, Ross het volgende geschreven:
>>> On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Please add proper Upstream-Status for the patches;
On 16 July 2012 11:44, Phil Blundell wrote:
> http://wiki.openembedded.org/index.php/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations
I've now RTFM'd, thanks. :)
Ross
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 11:37 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote:
> On 16 July 2012 11:33, Koen Kooi wrote:
> > I'm not debating the usefulness of the U-S field, I'm debating the
> > usefulness of using 'Pending' as a catch-all. I can do:
>
> In my eyes, "pending" means it's been submitted upstream somehow
On 16 July 2012 11:33, Koen Kooi wrote:
> I'm not debating the usefulness of the U-S field, I'm debating the usefulness
> of using 'Pending' as a catch-all. I can do:
In my eyes, "pending" means it's been submitted upstream somehow --
bug system, email, whatever.
Ross
_
On Monday 16 July 2012 12:33:00 Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 16 jul. 2012, om 10:47 heeft Burton, Ross het volgende geschreven:
> > On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>> Please add proper Upstream-Status for the patches; it is nice to have
> >>> those to track the pending patches.
> >>
> >> Isn'
Op 16 jul. 2012, om 10:47 heeft Burton, Ross het volgende geschreven:
> On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>> Please add proper Upstream-Status for the patches; it is nice to have
>>> those to track the pending patches.
>>
>> Isn't that field only used to put in "pending" and then backsla
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 08:11 +0200, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 15 jul. 2012, om 23:25 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
>
> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Koen Kooi
> > wrote:
> >> The recipe is autotools based now, the COPYING file was replaced with the
> >> complete GPLv2 license t
On 16 July 2012 07:11, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Please add proper Upstream-Status for the patches; it is nice to have
>> those to track the pending patches.
>
> Isn't that field only used to put in "pending" and then backslap each other
> on doing such a good job?
Personally I find it incredibly usef
Op 15 jul. 2012, om 23:25 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> The recipe is autotools based now, the COPYING file was replaced with the
>> complete GPLv2 license text.
>> No more 'lspci' needed ad runtime, but zlib and libnl are
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> The recipe is autotools based now, the COPYING file was replaced with the
> complete GPLv2 license text.
> No more 'lspci' needed ad runtime, but zlib and libnl are needed nowadays.
> Add 2 patches, one to fix cross builds and one from Linaro to
Op 14 jul. 2012, om 11:59 heeft Koen Kooi het volgende geschreven:
> The recipe is autotools based now, the COPYING file was replaced with the
> complete GPLv2 license text.
> No more 'lspci' needed ad runtime, but zlib and libnl are needed nowadays.
> Add 2 patches, one to fix cross builds and
The recipe is autotools based now, the COPYING file was replaced with the
complete GPLv2 license text.
No more 'lspci' needed ad runtime, but zlib and libnl are needed nowadays.
Add 2 patches, one to fix cross builds and one from Linaro to fix C state
parsing on !x86.
Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi
-
18 matches
Mail list logo
