[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] linux-yocto/3.4: v3.4.10 and uprobes/kprobes configuration updates

Khem Raj raj.khem at gmail.com
Tue Sep 11 05:22:07 UTC 2012

On (11/09/12 01:17), Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 12-09-11 1:16 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >On (11/09/12 00:58), Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >>On 12-09-11 12:55 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>>On (11/09/12 00:52), Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >>>>On 12-09-11 12:50 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> >>>>>On (10/09/12 14:11), Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> >>>>>>Updating to 3.4.10 which has been soaking for a bit now, as well
> >>>>>>as picking up the following meta commits from Tom Z:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>would it also need bumping linux-libc-headers too ?
> >>>>
> >>>>There's no new interfaces in the -stable updates, so there's no reason
> >>>>to bump. I typically elect to jump to a 3.x.0 and leave it there, but
> >>>>we had an interim bump that I wouldn't have done .. so we sit at 3.4.3
> >>>>at the moment (which is still fine).
> >>>
> >>>OK. Next question is, do stable updates get changes such that we need to
> >>>bump the linux-libc-headers ?
> >>
> >>Not that I've ever seen.
> >
> >OK thats what I was expecting to hear
> >so in theory if we always pin linux-libc-headers to major release we are
> >good. say 3.4.0 and then 3.6.0 and so on we really dont need 3.4.1 or
> >later and similarly for other versions. In this case we only bump
> >the linux-libc-headers recipe when we add a new major kernel release
> Correct. If you check the mailing list archives, I was a bit surprised
> to see it go to 3.4.3, but going forward, expect to only see major rev
> bumps.

yes essentually IIRC I mentioned that recipe should be called
blah_3.4.bb and blah_3.6.bb and so on and not really blah_3.4.x etc.
OK I am glad we are on same page boundary here :)

More information about the Openembedded-core mailing list