**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Mon Sep 16 02:59:59 2013
Sep 16 09:25:54 <ant_work> bluelightning: I've sent some patches and one or two are indeed debatable
Sep 16 09:26:44 <ant_work> about kexecboot-cfg I could not reproduce the double append but I'll refactor it anyway
Sep 16 09:27:08 <ant_work> what's urgent is to repair linux-yocto-tiny-kexecboot after the changes in the classes
Sep 16 09:27:32 <ant_work> before I could avoid all packaging tasks setting  PACKAGES = ""
Sep 16 09:28:01 <ant_work> now the tasks must be disbled one by one... I miss the switch ;)
Sep 16 09:34:58 <ant_work> fwiw i there any difference doing   do_package[noexec] = "1"  ?
Sep 16 09:36:05 <ant_work> I thought these were equivalent but I see snippets of code setting both (image.bbclass)...
Sep 16 09:36:07 <ant_work> do_bundle_initramfs[noexec] = "1"
Sep 16 09:36:07 <ant_work> do_bundle_initramfs () {
Sep 16 09:36:07 <ant_work> 	:
Sep 16 09:36:07 <ant_work> }
Sep 16 09:38:34 <bluelightning> hi ant_work
Sep 16 09:38:52 <ant_work> gm btw ;)
Sep 16 09:38:53 <bluelightning> there's not a huge difference, in the first instance bitbake doesn't execute the function, in the second it does but it's blank
Sep 16 09:40:11 <ant_work> I come to the error because I blank do_install so ofc do_package fails
Sep 16 09:40:56 <ant_work> anyway, even if the task is zapped it's dependencies aren't..
Sep 16 09:41:46 <ant_work> i.e for the example above there is another line
Sep 16 09:41:47 <ant_work> do_bundle_initramfs[depends] += "virtual/kernel:do_bundle_initramfs"
Sep 16 09:52:58 <ant_work> bluelightning: to repair l-y-t-kexecboot there is a pacth for kernel.bbclass pending, I'm in touch with Bruce for that
Sep 16 09:55:03 <ant_work> but that's again another issue.. ;)
**** ENDING LOGGING AT Tue Sep 17 02:59:58 2013