Is the layer that contains this file in conf/bblayers.conf? What about just building core-image-minimal (this image has no gui)? It could be.... you should check the differences between the two trees

Not sure about the Intel BSPs but they may contain just their layer and/or poky + meta-intel. It does not really matter where meta-intel lives on your file system though. It can be referenced directly

I made a recipe for libpfm3 and libpfm4 so let me submit those before anyone else spends time on it. -M

<elizabeth.flanagan@...> wrote: I've got a master-next branch I'm testing now and should be on master soon. I'm also debugging the oprofile issues from nightly-ppc as well. -M

<christopher.a.thornburg@...> wrote: Try running with bitbake -DDD and look for SState: messages. It will tell you the command used to test for sstate on the mirror and if it failed/passed. -M

Adding meta-freescale. -M <Tim.Verstraete@...> wrote:

Did it redeploy from an older sstate-cache? -M

<otavio@...> wrote: These are hosted on different organizations... I don't see any repos from git.yoctoproject.org on http://patches.openembedded.org/. Although it would be nice to have.

<sidebranch.openembedded@...> wrote: I've sent a request to fix this. -M

YoctoProject.org is now hosting a meta-freescale mailing list that are going to unify the communities of meta-fsl-ppc and meta-fsl-arm. From now on all patches affecting meta-fsl-ppc and meta-fsl-arm

I thought it would be here: http://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/pub/nightly-meta-intel/20121102-2 That's how it is for certain builds (e.g. p1022ds) from the DEST value towards the bottom of the page,

This is a patch to a private layer and should not go upstream. -M

You moved the patch against master over to meta-oe, why wouldn't you do the same for the denzil version? -M

Applied to meta-fsl-ppc master. -M

Cleaned up this commit message some and applied to meta-fsl-ppc master. Note: meta-fsl-ppc is going to be split into two layers soon... one with distro and one with machine support soon. -M

At a minimum give some hint what the errors were. I think the patches belong in meta-openembedded not in meta-fsl-ppc. Am I missing something here? -M

<bruce.ashfield@...> wrote: I agree. But, for the already released kernel already on git.freescale.com we will need these patches. Chunrong, Please send a pull request to our linux tree maintain

Frantic but was it actually limiting the build time? It would seem not according to Elvis observations. -M

You probably don't use much disk I/O with 16GB of memory for a build. -M

Applied to meta-fsl-ppc denzil, danny, and master. -M