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

[Laszlo Papp]

One person not using the latest toolchains?

At any rate, can someone provide a helper change from the past for
PACKAGEGROUP like changes?


On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <
rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 29 July 2013 15:34:29 Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org> wrote:
>
>> No, it should be disabled by default based on the fact most people do not
>> need this "rfkill" what even upstream has been disabling, and it would be
>> only enabled for those two utils out of the several thousand out there,
>> anyhow.
>>
>
> It was disabled just because of one guy known to notoriously use outdated
> toolchains on recent packages. But OK, I'm out of this whole discussion.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>> I am just repeating myself as the same is questioned again, again, and
>> again.
>>
>> ... or you really think that "rfkill" is needed for the majority use cases
>> out there?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <
>> rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On 29 July 2013 14:20:05 Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Oh, it is actually also in danny. I was looking into the "files"
>> >> directory,
>> >> but it is in the other.
>> >>
>> >> It is definitely not in denzil though.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Perhaps disable it only in the layer that pulls in these pre-2.6.31
>> kernel
>> > headers?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Laszlo Papp <lpapp at kde.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Only _one_, not two.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Phil Blundell <pb at pbcl.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 11:22 +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> >> >> > I disagree. This change should not have gone in the first place
>> >> >> > causing the regression for the users. Please be consistent with
>> the
>> >> >> > history.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If this was a recent change then I would have some (limited) amount
>> of
>> >> >> sympathy for your position.  But the commit you are complaining
>> about
>> >> >> has been in the tree for over a year, and it was presumably
>> included in
>> >> >> at least one if not two of the most recent stable releases.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> p.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Sent with AquaMail for Android
>> > http://www.aqua-mail.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
> Sent with AquaMail for Android
> http://www.aqua-mail.com
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20130730/30ff4b34/attachment-0002.html>