On 09/22/2013 04:44 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 11:13 +0800, ChenQi wrote:
ping
I replied to this:
"""
This is not correct. The correct behaviour here is to uninstall these
packages *if* they are installed. Just removing it from the list is not
the real fix.
"""
and I stan
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 11:13 +0800, ChenQi wrote:
> ping
I replied to this:
"""
This is not correct. The correct behaviour here is to uninstall these
packages *if* they are installed. Just removing it from the list is not
the real fix.
"""
and I stand by that feedback.
Cheers,
Richard
ping
On 09/13/2013 10:09 AM, qi.c...@windriver.com wrote:
From: Chen Qi
In rootfs_uninstall_unneeded function, the update-rc.d package would
be removed if no 'package-management' and no delayed postinsts.
However, in update-rc.d.bbclass, the update-rc.d package is only
recommended. Thus, if N
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 10:09 +0800, qi.c...@windriver.com wrote:
> From: Chen Qi
>
> In rootfs_uninstall_unneeded function, the update-rc.d package would
> be removed if no 'package-management' and no delayed postinsts.
>
> However, in update-rc.d.bbclass, the update-rc.d package is only
> recomm
From: Chen Qi
In rootfs_uninstall_unneeded function, the update-rc.d package would
be removed if no 'package-management' and no delayed postinsts.
However, in update-rc.d.bbclass, the update-rc.d package is only
recommended. Thus, if NO_RECOMMENDATIONS is enabled or 'update-rc.d'
is added to BAD
