**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Mon Dec 05 02:59:58 2011 Dec 05 06:23:11 how do i include kernel modules in my rootfs but not include the kernel image? because when i include kernel modules, the kernel image will also be included. Dec 05 09:16:32 adrianmiller: I have not been able to get that working either. Dec 05 13:51:24 * zeddii is back in eastern time .. Dec 05 19:57:58 Is Bruce Ashfield around? Dec 05 21:10:53 incandescant: is that tree you published for edison 1.1.1? Dec 05 21:11:13 sort of assuming josh is you Dec 05 21:26:21 msm: yes, that's me - I've some more patches to roll into it yet though Dec 05 21:26:32 * incandescant saw some patches from RP and msm for sstate Dec 05 21:35:39 incandescant: they never stop coming =) Dec 05 21:42:26 msm: more patches pushed to the contrib branch Dec 05 21:42:51 * incandescant prepares a test build Dec 05 21:46:52 incandescant: I guess I should attempt a rebase Dec 05 21:46:57 and see what I have Dec 05 21:47:26 msm: sounds like it will be painful :-) Dec 05 21:49:19 incandescant: should be easy Dec 05 21:49:36 rebase should make your patches just fall out of my list Dec 05 21:50:07 msm: hopefully, I'm sceptical though Dec 05 21:51:42 incandescant: you have atleast half of my patches Dec 05 21:51:55 msm: wow, that few? Dec 05 21:54:47 incandescant: oh well Dec 05 21:54:50 my list is longer now Dec 05 21:54:55 incandescant: did you modify bitbake/lib/bb/runqueue.py Dec 05 21:55:15 msm: I believe I merged patches there, yes Dec 05 21:56:05 yep, definitely a few patches against runqueue Dec 05 21:56:42 did you decide to pick up all bitbake patches or not? Dec 05 21:57:29 I didn't take all of them, no Dec 05 21:57:35 I didn't take new features Dec 05 21:58:49 incandescant: it applies fairly cleanly Dec 05 21:58:55 a few bitbake patches conflict Dec 05 21:59:07 msm: is that the bb.data.getVar -> d.getVar changes? Dec 05 21:59:10 did you apply changes to bitbake/ that are changed from master? Dec 05 21:59:25 incandescant: right… that's one annoying one Dec 05 21:59:34 breaks all the dam bitbake patches Dec 05 21:59:40 yep :-/ Dec 05 21:59:44 or breaks the cherry-pick-ability of everything Dec 05 22:00:27 how many more BB patches do you have? Dec 05 22:01:19 there were 4 i dropped Dec 05 22:01:45 then more that applied cleanly Dec 05 22:01:50 i did not *NEED* all those patches though Dec 05 22:02:18 i essentially just updated bitbake to 0.15.0 instead of making this weird version of bitbake Dec 05 22:02:23 that was my thought process at least Dec 05 22:06:50 I understand the thought process, but weird hybrid versions are what stable releases are all about :-) Dec 05 22:07:02 if you tell me what bb patches you need I'll merge them Dec 05 22:08:11 sgw: ping Dec 05 22:08:12 there are a few kergoth, vardep stuff Dec 05 22:08:16 vardepvalue Dec 05 22:08:49 incandescant: anything touch siggen.py is essential Dec 05 22:09:30 I thought I got all those? Dec 05 22:09:36 * incandescant double checks Dec 05 22:09:43 incandescant: (btw, im just suggesting things not going to force) Dec 05 22:09:50 incandescant: wait, let me make sure i dont have empty patches Dec 05 22:10:42 incandescant: ugh, i got some weird monsters out of my rebase Dec 05 22:10:49 like 'siggen.py: sort task hash depedencies with basepath' turned into two patches Dec 05 22:10:53 msm: sorry, I tried to warn you Dec 05 22:10:56 incandescant: i need to look closer before I say anything Dec 05 22:11:11 incandescant: haha - fair enough Dec 05 22:11:38 is there an option to rebase and only apply patches that fully apply Dec 05 22:12:58 incandescant: anyways, i need to run… will look closer soon Dec 05 22:13:42 msm: thanks Dec 05 22:27:59 ant____: what's up? Dec 05 22:29:04 hi there Dec 05 22:29:36 I've seen there are upcoming xserver upgrades Dec 05 22:30:35 now, there is drift between oe-core and meta-oe xserver-nodm-init Dec 05 22:31:16 well, in fact I think the only good think one would import in oe-core (for the moment) is the xinput-calibrator Dec 05 22:31:50 fwiw the recipe in meta-oe is "systemd friendly" Dec 05 22:32:36 still I can't start X when using meta-oe layer on the top of oe-core Dec 05 22:32:43 :/ Dec 05 23:24:39 ant____: it works fine for me here Dec 05 23:24:58 ant____: but i am using systemd ... Dec 05 23:26:02 look, one is for rootless support and the other for user=root :p Dec 05 23:30:27 ant____: what you have problems with? both? Dec 05 23:32:20 no, if I use oe-core only the sato image boots Dec 05 23:32:51 see my msg "xserver-common and x11-common conflicting" Dec 06 00:15:36 gn Dec 06 01:32:47 Jefro: you're on TV ;) Dec 06 01:33:10 wmat :) I'm ready for my close-up Dec 06 01:34:14 * wmat learns about some gui thing for bitbake ;) Dec 06 01:35:17 wmat: great interview with Jeremy on your blog Dec 06 01:35:45 thx Dec 06 01:36:36 i wish it could have been longer Dec 06 01:36:44 he's an interesting guy Dec 06 01:37:22 he's quietly listening right now ;) Dec 06 01:41:28 Jefro: i like that the caption includes your nick, btw Dec 06 01:42:29 wmat: well, one has to have standards Dec 06 01:43:34 othewise people would just be all "Jeff O.. what? who?" Dec 06 01:44:07 heh **** ENDING LOGGING AT Tue Dec 06 02:59:57 2011