<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 28 January 2016 at 13:40, Alexander Kanavin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com" target="_blank">alexander.kanavin@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"><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Most of the times, it is hard to do a bitbake world for every upgrades.<br>
(regular build, x32, musl, uclibc and possibly one more architecture combinations)<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Yes, of course. It's often a waste of time watching world builds, so it's a personal judgement call, but at least when there's a possibility of potential API breakage, that should be checked and the easiest way, if you have a bunch of updates and don't feel like disentangling their downstream dependencies, is to run 'world'.<br></blockquote></div><br>If bluez5 works then the API can't have broken that much... once it's in mut the autobuilder can give it a stress test anyway.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Ross</div></div>