Yocto layers missing thud branches

Yocto layers missing thud branches

[akuster808]

Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
please add a "Thud" branch

kind regards,
Armin

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[Nicolas Dechesne]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 728 bytes --]

hi,

while we are there.. in our builds we use the following layers which also
need the 'thud' branches:

    name="OSSystems/meta-browser" path="layers/meta-browser"
    name="git/meta-ti" path="layers/meta-ti" remote="yocto"
    name="kraj/meta-clang" path="layers/meta-clang"
    name="meta-rust/meta-rust" path="layers/meta-rust"

thanks!
nico

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 12:50 AM akuster808 <akuster808@gmail.com> wrote:

> Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
> please add a "Thud" branch
>
> kind regards,
> Armin
> --
> _______________________________________________
> yocto mailing list
> yocto@yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1391 bytes --]

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[Max Krummenacher]

Hi

Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808:
> Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
> please add a "Thud" branch
> 
While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are not
yet applied:
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html

Thanks.
Max

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[Paul Eggleton]

On Monday, 19 November 2018 12:11:35 AM NZDT Max Krummenacher wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808:
> > Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
> > please add a "Thud" branch
> > 
> While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are not
> yet applied:
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html

I have just taken care of meta-qt3 and meta-qt4, FWIW.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[akuster808]

On 11/18/18 12:47 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Monday, 19 November 2018 12:11:35 AM NZDT Max Krummenacher wrote:
>> Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808:
>>> Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
>>> please add a "Thud" branch
>>>
>> While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are not
>> yet applied:
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html
> I have just taken care of meta-qt3 and meta-qt4, FWIW.
Thanks Paul.

>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[Richard Purdie]

On Mon, 2018-11-19 at 09:47 +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Monday, 19 November 2018 12:11:35 AM NZDT Max Krummenacher wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808:
> > > Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and
> > > meta-cgl
> > > please add a "Thud" branch
> > > 
> > 
> > While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are
> > not
> > yet applied:
> > 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html
> > 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html
> > 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html
> 
> I have just taken care of meta-qt3 and meta-qt4, FWIW.

Given we don't test those any more, should we be pushing these new
branches?

Cheers,

Richard

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[akuster808]

On 11/20/18 4:05 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-11-19 at 09:47 +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>> On Monday, 19 November 2018 12:11:35 AM NZDT Max Krummenacher wrote:
>>> Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808:
>>>> Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and
>>>> meta-cgl
>>>> please add a "Thud" branch
>>>>
>>> While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are
>>> not
>>> yet applied:
>>>
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html
>> I have just taken care of meta-qt3 and meta-qt4, FWIW.
> Given we don't test those any more, should we be pushing these new
> branches?
Are the branching schemes in sync with what we test , build or both?  I
think we should be clear what is built or built and tested if there are
exception.


The 2.6 release notes called out so it may lead to the conclusion its
tested.

Release Name: meta-qt3-thud-20.0.0
Branch: thud
Tag: thud-20.0.0
Hash: 02f273cba6c25f5cf20cb66d8a417a83772c3179
md5: 7b73bf1132428ea898938b03815cad21

- armin
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[richard.purdie]

On Tue, 2018-11-20 at 16:21 -0700, akuster808 wrote:
> 
> On 11/20/18 4:05 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-11-19 at 09:47 +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > On Monday, 19 November 2018 12:11:35 AM NZDT Max Krummenacher wrote:
> > > > Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808:
> > > > > Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and
> > > > > meta-cgl
> > > > > please add a "Thud" branch
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are
> > > > not
> > > > yet applied:
> > > > 
> > 
> > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html
> > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html
> > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html
> > > I have just taken care of meta-qt3 and meta-qt4, FWIW.
> > 
> > Given we don't test those any more, should we be pushing these new
> > branches?
> 
> Are the branching schemes in sync with what we test , build or both? 
> I think we should be clear what is built or built and tested if there
> are exception.
> 
> 
> The 2.6 release notes called out so it may lead to the conclusion its
> tested.
> 
> Release Name: meta-qt3-thud-20.0.0
> Branch: thud
> Tag: thud-20.0.0
> Hash: 02f273cba6c25f5cf20cb66d8a417a83772c3179
> md5: 7b73bf1132428ea898938b03815cad21

Scripts may have put that in the release notes and even done tagging
but I'm fairly sure it doesn't get built or tested...

I think processes are being followed without review. Yes, I probably
should have caught this before now but I'm not alone in that :(.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[Matthias Schoepfer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

Hi there,

seems like meta-java also missing a thud branch?!

git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-java

Regards,

   Matthias


On 11/18/2018 12:50 AM, akuster808 wrote:
> Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
> please add a "Thud" branch
>
> kind regards,
> Armin


[-- Attachment #2: pEpkey.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 1841 bytes --]

Re: Yocto layers missing thud branches

[Stephen Lawrence]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: yocto-bounces@yoctoproject.org <yocto-bounces@yoctoproject.org> On Behalf
> Of akuster808
> Sent: 17 November 2018 23:50
> To: yocto@yoctoproject.org
> Subject: [yocto] Yocto layers missing thud branches
> 
> Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and meta-cgl
> please add a "Thud" branch
> 
> kind regards,
> Armin

Anyone looking for Thud support for the automotive IVI layer meta-ivi [1]
can find it on the master branch. That is the working branch ahead of the next
major meta-ivi release early next year, which will be based on Thud.

[1] https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ivi/

Regards

Steve