[OE-core] [PATCH] busybox-1.21.1/defconfig: disable rfkill

[Laszlo Papp]

As we have already discussed that, it is not any clear at all without
example. Yes, the end user does not really care about the internal
implementation of the feature ....

Please provide useful examples and tutorials how to use a feature
especially when a user (and apparently others posting here) is such
clueless.

Oh, by the way, and I have mentioned this in the bug report as well. We
need proper documentation, examples, and tutorials; i.e. I am not ahead of
the day when I first read this post. ;-)


On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton at intel.com>wrote:

> On 13 August 2013 08:32, Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org> wrote:
> > So, everyone suggested PACKAGECONFIG in here on the mailing list except
> Khem
> > whose reply I did not get.
> >
> > Yet, 4964 got closed by the "team". Could anyone please give a sane
> > description why and what would block the end users other than fork?
>
> Quoting from comment 1 on 4964:
>
> """
> Busybox is a rather complicated beast. PACKAGECONFIG is unfortunately
> not sufficient to manage it's config system. It is very similar to the
> Linux kernel config and we recently added configuration fragment
> support to busybox from the kernel recipes:
>
> commit 56dc1720caa48344238d352c7b6e9b0f0d41aa54
> Author: Chen Qi <Qi.Chen at windriver.com>
> Date:   Tue Feb 5 14:36:40 2013 +0800
>
>     busybox: add config fragments
>
> This allows you to use the default config and include only the delta
> in your layer's bbappend in the form of a config fragment added to the
> SRC_URI.
> """
>
> If this isn't sufficient or is buggy, then fixing this is preferred
> (it works for the kernel, so should work for busybox).
>
> Ross
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20130813/d41609c1/attachment-0002.html>