>-----Original Message----- >From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto- >boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Flanagan >Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 10:58 AM >To: yocto@yoctoproject.org >Subject: Re: [yocto] Results from Yocto 1.0.1 Go/No-Go meeting: No-Go > > > >On 05/19/2011 10:41 AM, Saul Wold wrote: >> Investigation is complete. >> >> This issue is related to how libzypp constructs a header file in >bitbake >> using PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS. In 1.0.1 the PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS was >> cumulative list defined in both crownbay*.conf and tune-atom.inc. In >> 1.1 this was changed to just be set once in the tune-atom.inc. >> >> Because it was a cumulative list, it included x86 twice in 1.0.1 and >> only once and correctly 1.1. >> >> So the fix is in the crownbay BSP, and does not affect the core 1.0.1 >> base as we currently have it. This means no respin or re-test is >> required of the existing bit. >> >> ** Is this sufficient information to change to a "GO", pending the >> beagleboard testing at this point? ** >> >> Sau! >> >> > >I would like to just spin a nightly-external once the beagleboard patch >gets in, to verify the fix. If the fix gets in >today, I can have it done before our weekly 1.1-preM1 build.
Sounds great! If Beth is able to create the Beagleboard image for testing and Jiajun is able to test before Tuesday, we could have another go/no-go discussion during the Technical Team meeting to (hopefully) be able to release 1.0.1 early next week. I will add that to the Tuesday agenda. - Julie >--------------- >Elizabeth Flanagan >Yocto Project >Release Engineer >_______________________________________________ >yocto mailing list >yocto@yoctoproject.org >https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
