<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 3:54 AM, Saul Wold <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sgw@linux.intel.com" target="_blank">sgw@linux.intel.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Rebase the patches due to macro name changes.<br>
<br>
Signed-off-by: Saul Wold <<a href="mailto:sgw@linux.intel.com">sgw@linux.intel.com</a>><br>... </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">-PR = "${INC_PR}.0"<br>
-<br>
-SRC_URI[md5sum] = "ba74b22c788a0c8547976b880cd02b17"<br>
-SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "2b59897864d6220ff20aa8eac64cac8994e004898a1c0f899c8cb4d7b7570b46"<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I find it hard to spot the checksums to be in the .inc file.</div><div><br></div><div>
I'd prefer to have them in the .bb recipes (even if in this case it'd be a duplication).</div><div><br></div><div>In case you would like to avoid the duplication (which I agree) you might before, or later, merge the native handle onto the cmake_<ver>.bb recipe.</div>
<div><br></div><div>What do you think?</div><div><br></div></div>-- <br>Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems<br>E-mail: <a href="mailto:otavio@ossystems.com.br" target="_blank">otavio@ossystems.com.br</a> <a href="http://www.ossystems.com.br" target="_blank">http://www.ossystems.com.br</a><br>
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 <a href="http://projetos.ossystems.com.br" target="_blank">http://projetos.ossystems.com.br</a><br><br>