Koen Kooi [Fri, 9 Mar 2018 10:55:14 +0000 (11:55 +0100)]
openssl: fix libdir logic to allow multiarch style paths
The recipes were using 'basename' to turn '/usr/lib' into 'lib', which breaks when libdir is '/usr/lib/tuple', leading to libraries ending up in '/usr/tuple', which isn't in FILES_*. Change the logic to use sed to strip the prefix instead.
Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi <koen.kooi@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Richard Purdie [Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:52:18 +0000 (09:52 -0700)]
uninative: Add compatiblity version check
If glibc is newer on the host than in uninative, the failure mode is
pretty nasty for clusters where the sstate is shared, including the Yocto
Project autobuilder.
This check aborts the use of uninative in such scenarios where a newer
glibc version appears and avoids corruption of sstate caches.
We use ldd to check the glibc version since that is included in libc-bin
(or equivalent) which locales use so it should always be present.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Ross Burton [Mon, 12 Mar 2018 16:38:58 +0000 (16:38 +0000)]
build-recipe-list: build universe instead of world
Building world means recipes that are excluded from world build for whatever
reason get skipped from the manifests, which isn't useful. Instead building
universe and pass -k so that the expected dependency failures are not fatal.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Ross Burton [Mon, 12 Mar 2018 16:38:57 +0000 (16:38 +0000)]
meta: remove some EXCLUDE_FROM_WORLD assignments
Now that we have recipe-specific-sysroots we don't need to exclude recipes from
world builds because they conflict with other recipes, as they'll all be built
with their own sysroots.
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Trevor Woerner [Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:22:33 +0000 (11:22 -0400)]
iproute2: fix rebuild failures
When rebuilding iproute2, many such instances of the following build failure
occur:
| make[1]: Entering directory '.../iproute2/4.14.1-r0/iproute2-4.14.1/lib'
| Makefile:1: ../config.mk: No such file or directory
| make[1]: *** No rule to make target '../config.mk'. Stop.
Signed-off-by: Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
lib/oe/patch.py: add a warning if patch context was ignored
Ignoring patch context increases the chances of patches being
applied incorrectly. Depending on what code is being patched, this can go
completely unnoticed and create subtle bugs, sometimes with security implications.
Please see here for a specific example:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450
On the other hand, we cannot simply force all patch context to match exactly:
doing this would break a lot of recipes suddenly, across all layers.
So let's try a softer approach: issue a warning, and gently update
patches over a longer span of time. When most of the warnings are eliminated,
we can start enforcing a strict patch application policy.
I do understand that this patch creates a lot of warnings all of a sudden, however
I believe the problem does need to be addressed. All of oe-core recipes have their
context already fixed.
Sample warning:
WARNING: vulkan-1.0.61.1-r0 do_patch:
Some of the context lines in patches were ignored. This can lead to incorrectly applied patches.
The context lines in the patches can be updated with devtool:
Then the updated patches and the source tree (in devtool's workspace)
should be reviewed to make sure the patches apply in the correct place
and don't introduce duplicate lines (which can, and does happen
when some of the context is ignored).
Details:
Applying patch demos-Don-t-build-tri-or-cube.patch
patching file demos/CMakeLists.txt
Hunk #1 succeeded at 63 (offset 2 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 76 with fuzz 1 (offset 2 lines).
[YOCTO #10450]
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
oe-selftest: add a test for failing package post-installation scriptlets
The test runs a scriptlet that has an intentionally failing command in the middle
and checks for two things:
1) that bitbake does warn the user about the failure
2) that scriptlet execution stops at that point.
The test is run for all three package types: rpm, deb, ipk.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
meta/lib/oe/package_manager.py: warn about failing scriptlets for all package types
Previously this was done only for rpm packages; now also ipk/deb scriptlet
failures are reported.
In the future this will become a hard error, but it can't yet happen
due to the legacy 'exit 1' way of deferring scriptlet execution to first boot which
needs a deprecation period.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
package.bbclass: run pre/post installation/removal scriptlets using sh -e
This allows catching errors in the scriptlets which would otherwise
go unnoticed, e.g. this sequence:
====
bogus_command
proper_command
====
would work just fine without any visible warnings or errors.
This was previously done only for rpm packages; this patch replaces
the rpm-specific tweak with one that works for all package types.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
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>
