Juro Bystricky [Sat, 10 Mar 2018 19:27:29 +0000 (11:27 -0800)]
openssl_1.0.2n: improve reproducibility
Improve reproducible build of:
openssl-staticdev
openssl-dbg
libcrypto
There are two main causes that prevent reproducible build, both related to
the generated file "buildinf.h":
1. "buildinf.h" contains build host CFLAGS, containing various build
host references. We need to pass sanitized CFLAGS to the script
generating this file ("mkbuildinf.pl". )
2. We also need to modify the script "mkbuildinf.pl" itsel in order to
generate a build timestamp based on SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH, if present in
the environment.
Signed-off-by: Juro Bystricky <juro.bystricky@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Juro Bystricky [Sat, 10 Mar 2018 18:56:25 +0000 (10:56 -0800)]
classes/recipes: Use expanded BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES value
Replace the occurences of BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES with expanded
values ${BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES} so the variable does not need to be
exported.
Signed-off-by: Juro Bystricky <juro.bystricky@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:13 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
attr: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:12 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
libunwind: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:11 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
libtiff: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:10 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
cryptodev: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:09 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
blktrace: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:08 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
xorg-xserver: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:06 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
mesa: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:05 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
drm: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:04 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
gtk-doc: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:03 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
gnome: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:02 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
sysstat: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:01 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
rpcbind: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:56:00 +0000 (20:56 +0200)]
newt: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:59 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
net-tools: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:58 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
ltp: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:57 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
ethtool: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:56 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
cups: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:55 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
tcf-agent: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:54 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
ruby: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:52 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
qemu: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:51 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
python: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:50 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
opkg-utils: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:49 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
m4: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:48 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
i2c-tools: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Due to patch fuzz, it was applied again, so the same code sequence was
repeated twice. Not sure if that caused any bugs, but certainly wasn't
the right thing to do.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:46 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
e2fsprogs: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
The patch was applied in a completely incorrect spot (due to fuzz),
no one noticed or complained. Meanwhile upstream says the issue
has been resolved differently:
https://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3759&user=guest&pass=guest
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:44 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
openssl: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:43 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
iproute2: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:42 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
avahi: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:41 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
u-boot: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:55:39 +0000 (20:55 +0200)]
pciutils: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Without this flag, devtool will not deem the commits in the workspace
different to patches in the layer, even if the commits have different,
up-to-date context line in them.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
meta/lib/oe/patch.py: do not leave .orig files if a patch isn't perfectly matching
Particularly, this was causing 'devtool modify' to erroneously add those
.orig files into commits. This was getting in the way, if the goal
was to amend/update those existing patches.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:18:03 +0000 (20:18 +0200)]
perl: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:18:02 +0000 (20:18 +0200)]
python: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:18:00 +0000 (20:18 +0200)]
irda-utils: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:59 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
zlib: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:58 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
util-linux: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:57 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
ppp: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:56 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
syslinux: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:55 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
mtd-utils: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:54 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
intltool: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:53 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
automake: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:52 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
apt: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:50 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
tcp-wrappers: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:49 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
parted: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:48 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
libpam: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:47 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
mdadm: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:46 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
libidn: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
The patch was adding a change to the source file that was already there,
so the lines of code were repeated twice. This didn't create a bug or a
security issue, but it may well have.
Long story:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:44 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
ghostscript: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:43 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
ethtool: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:42 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
bash: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:41 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
at: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:40 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
xset: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:39 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
clutter: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:38 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
wayland: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:37 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
lttng-ust: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:36 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
dtc: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:35 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
kmod: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:34 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
gstreamer: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:33 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
libtiff: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:32 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
libksba: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:31 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
libffi: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:30 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
gnutls: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:29 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
gmp: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:28 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
libical: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:27 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
nspr: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:26 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
serf: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:25 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
shared-mime-info: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:24 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
grub: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Ross Burton [Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:17:23 +0000 (20:17 +0200)]
expat: refresh patches
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Bruce Ashfield [Tue, 6 Mar 2018 18:11:17 +0000 (13:11 -0500)]
kernel: make copying of crtsavres.o conditional
As of the 4.13 kernel, there are configuration + linker combinations
that do not need (or build) crtsavres.o for ppc64 targets. The commit
of interest is:
powerpc/64: Linker on-demand sfpr functions for modules
For final link, the powerpc64 linker generates fpr save/restore
functions on-demand, placing them in the .sfpr section. Starting with
binutils 2.25, these can be provided for non-final links with
--save-restore-funcs. Use that where possible for module links.
This saves about 200 bytes per module (~60kB) on powernv defconfig
build.
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
As such, our arch test for crtsavres.o is not enough, we add a secondary
existence check before trying the copy.
[YOCTO #12576]
Signed-off-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Jason Wessel [Wed, 7 Mar 2018 20:00:37 +0000 (12:00 -0800)]
python3: Fix install purelib to make pip3-python work properly
The oe-core version of python3 patches the purelib use directory to
the system libdir so as to make it work with multilibs properly inside
the patch fix_for_using_different_libdir.patch with:
The problem is that this broke the pip3-python package because the
install directory is out of sync when using a multilib version of
python. When ever a module is installed with pip3 install that is a
purelib it will get installed to a location that python3 will never
reference and cause random failures.
This patch fixes the purelib install directory to match the purelib
use directory for externally managed python modules when using
multilibs.
Signed-off-by: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Niko Mauno [Wed, 28 Feb 2018 16:20:08 +0000 (18:20 +0200)]
package_manager.py: Explicit complementary fail
When running bitbake -c populate_sdk <image_name>, it is expected that
packages matching SDKIMAGE_INSTALL_COMPLEMENTARY name mask (unless
declared in PACKAGE_EXCLUDE_COMPLEMENTARY) are installed to resulting
SDK. Underlying mechanism issues a package manager install call for set
of complementary packages. However the mechanism doesn't seem to inform
the user all too obviously in case the package manager command behind
install_complementary() method fails -- and since it is combined with
attempt_only=True option, user might end up wondering why several *-dev,
*-dbg packages are missing from resulting SDK.
Improve associated install() method behaviour in affected OpkgPM and
DpkgPM classes so that a problematic state of affairs becomes directly
obvious for bitbake user, resulting in shell output like:
WARNING: someimage-1.0-r0 do_populate_sdk: Unable to install packages.
Command '...' returned 1:
Collected errors:
* Solver encountered 1 problem(s):
* Problem 1/1:
* - package somepkg-dev-1.0-r0.x86 requires somepkg = 1.0-r0, but
none of the providers can be installed
*
* Solution 1:
* - allow deinstallation of someotherpkg-1.1-r1.x86
* - do not ask to install a package providing somepkg-dev
* Solution 2:
* - do not ask to install a package providing somepkg-dev
Signed-off-by: Niko Mauno <niko.mauno@vaisala.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
fs/aufs/debug.h:95:19: warning: comparison of constant '0'
with boolean expression is always false [-Wbool-compare]
if (unlikely((e) < 0)) \
^
fs/aufs/vdir.c:852:2: note: in expansion of macro 'AuTraceErr'
AuTraceErr(!valid);
^~~~~~~~~~
In expansion of AuTraceErr(!valid), comparison of (!valid)
and constant '0' always passes unlikely(x) false. function
'static int seek_vdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx)'
is to find whether there is a valid vd_deblk following ctx->pos.
return 1 means valid, 0 for not. Change to AuTraceErr(valid - 1)
makes more sense.
Signed-off-by: Kexin(Casey) Chen <Casey.Chen@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Dengke Du <dengke.du@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>