On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 14:36 +, Iorga, Cristian wrote:
> " why having it be so is not a very good thing."
>
> Sorry, I did not understood this part.
>
> Judging by my investigation, is RREPLACES needed or not?
I don't believe there is any justification for making bluez4 Replace:
bluez5.
I th
Blundell; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3 0/2] BlueZ 5 experimental recipes
On 07/16/2013 07:36 AM, Iorga, Cristian wrote:
> " why having it be so is not a very good thing."
>
> Sorry, I did not understood this part.
>
> Judgin
y, July 16, 2013 5:34 PM
To: Iorga, Cristian
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3 0/2] BlueZ 5 experimental recipes
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 17:28 +0300, Cristian Iorga wrote:
Observe my investigation below in order to decide if RREPLACES is needed.
Conclusion:
ristian
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH V3 0/2] BlueZ 5 experimental recipes
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 17:28 +0300, Cristian Iorga wrote:
> Observe my investigation below in order to decide if RREPLACES is needed.
> Conclusion: BlueZ 5.x will be eventually an upg
On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 17:28 +0300, Cristian Iorga wrote:
> Observe my investigation below in order to decide if RREPLACES is needed.
> Conclusion: BlueZ 5.x will be eventually an upgrade path for an already
> installed
> embedded device. As such, RREPLACES is needed for a system-wide upgrade.
It
This sets of patches adds bluez5 recipes as experimental packages.
BlueZ 5.X is not an upgrade for Bluez 4.x, as such, no upgrade is
provided/possible.
The two versions of the BT stack also conflicts each other.
Observe my investigation below in order to decide if RREPLACES is needed.
Conclusion:
