Also if we keep the 4.6.x notation, it helps matching gcc -v with the gcc_4.6.x package installed on the target.
Thanks, Nitin > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Richard Purdie > Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:38 PM > To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer > Subject: Re: [OE-core] gcc 4.6 recipes naming > > On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 10:33 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Richard Purdie > > > I think this is just going to confuse people to be honest. I'm > happy to > > > stick to the 4.6.0 naming, then move to 4.6.1 and so forth over > time. > > > People expect to see the .X number else they just get confused > about > > > which patch revision we're at. > > > > > > What I'm thinking we will do differently to OE is not to have every > > > point release available but try and stick to the latest. The > exception > > > would be when there is a problem in the point release version which > we > > > don't have a fix for. > > > > usually later minor release will always be better (since they are > bugfixes only) > > so chances are less that we will regress > > Agreed, I'm just being clear what the expectations are! :) > > > > Does that sound reasonable? > > > > > > > Yes having just one minor release at a time makes it easier > certainly. > > I was trying to make it easy to push updates and we could avoid some > > git operations and logs would be straighter too since recipes would > live > > longer otherwise we will be git mv'ing them every 6 months when > release happens. > > I think this is fine, we do this for the other recipes too. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
