[meta-intel] standard/intel/base revisions

[Patrick Ohly]

On Mon, 2016-10-03 at 12:30 -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-10-03 at 14:42 -0400, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Cal Sullivan <california.l.sullivan at i
> > ntel.com> wrote:
> > > + Bruce
> > > 
> > > I also can't find that revision on the remote branch...
> > 
> > There were some fixups lately, but yah, I don't see that revision
> > either. One of the
> > rebase branches was force updated for those cleanups, but not
> > standard/intel/base.

So it's not certain yet how this happened? I think it would be
worthwhile to investigate, to ensure that similar mistakes won't happen
again.

> > Either way, I sent a pull request late last night that has the
> > revisions I've been testing
> > so they should work.

Does that bring back 94e5bb30ea onto the standard/intel/base branch?

> The problem is that the current and existing Ostro Project is using the
> hash in question and so missing it from the existing 4.4 will cause
> issues for them.

Not just Ostro - unless I miss something, anyone using the current
meta-intel will be unable to build the 4.4 kernel from upstream sources.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.