Re: Maintaining ABI Compatibility for LTS branch
On Wed, 2022-02-09 at 18:41 +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
Sorry, I'm getting confused here with earlier work Michael Ho did at BMW. The
are the revised version from last year which *does* hook into hash equivalence.
I'm getting two things confused, sorry.
The nice thing about the layer above is that it is a standalone layer, we don't
have to merge it in order to use it. This shows the power of the new hash
equivalence code as it is a plugin to it. We may consider merging it at some
point but there is less of a pressing need and we need time to experiment with
At this point it is a proof of concept and doesn't solve the ABI problem you're
describing in the original email. Sorry about any confusion.
The abidw recipe could be useful to your ABI issue.