[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-ppc denzil] cryptodev kernel module recipe
otavio at ossystems.com.br
Wed Nov 28 11:52:49 PST 2012
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:33 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
<B29882 at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:00 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
>> <B29882 at freescale.com> wrote:
>>>>> You made the same mistake reveiwing this Darren did... these are NOT
>>>>> in our recipe they are in the projects Makefile that we don't control.
>>>>> We are just patching up the Makefile a bit so it works properly and
>>>>> don't want to redefine variables this project has been using.
>>>>> OTOH this patch needs an upstream-status and also needs to be sent upstream.
>>>> Yes I know it is inside of the project Makefile however you're
>>>> patching it anyway so better to make it us the standards and send
>>> That's fine, but I would not let that hold up this patch if the author
>>> did not want to pursue getting upstream to change such things. ;)
>> This recipe is not target to meta-fsl-ppc, is it? It seems to fit
> Well, the maintainer there would have the final say, but I think
> changing an upstream projects stuff should not effect it's acceptance
> (into meta-oe or meta-fsl-ppc)
I am not in position to nack something for meta-fsl-ppc. In meta-oe I
am in some areas but not in crypto packages; however meta-oe
discussion is off-topic here.
My intention to comment on the recipe was to help. I noticed something
that had an alternative solution and seemed easy to improve it as it
was going to add a patch for Makefile so change one or two lines
wouldn't be a big deal ...
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio at ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
More information about the meta-freescale