summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* bitbake: utils.py: Add option for explode_dep_versions2 to return unsortedAmanda Brindle2018-03-151-2/+3
| | | | | | | | | | | | Before, explode_dep_versions2 would sort the OrderedDict before returning. This function will still sort the OrderedDict by default, but will now have the option to return the OrderedDict unsorted. This option will allow us to check if the order of the package list has changed. (Bitbake rev: 39d6a30a28f66c599e18beddbd847f40dcff623c) Signed-off-by: Amanda Brindle <amanda.r.brindle@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* dbus-test-ptest: improve reproducibilityJuro Bystricky2018-03-121-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | Remove build host references from additional files. (From OE-Core rev: 073d8d001033471d7fe44f52212c72a6c3541313) Signed-off-by: Juro Bystricky <juro.bystricky@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* reproducible_build_simple.bbclass: simple environment for reproducible binariesJuro Bystricky2018-03-121-0/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Export environmental variables needed for binary reproducibility with consistent values. This class can be used either directly via: INHERIT += "reproducible_build_simple" or can be inherited by a more complex/complete bbclass, for example a bblass which will crack SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH for each recipe. (From OE-Core rev: 5c2685c5ee2f8210a36b9a8591491b6af0482084) Signed-off-by: Juro Bystricky <juro.bystricky@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* classes/recipes: Use expanded BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES valueJuro Bystricky2018-03-124-5/+5
| | | | | | | | | | | Replace the occurences of BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES with expanded values ${BUILD_REPRODUCIBLE_BINARIES} so the variable does not need to be exported. (From OE-Core rev: 27f87bbc8395a2481ef808465a62d213a6b678ac) Signed-off-by: Juro Bystricky <juro.bystricky@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* yocto-uninative: Upgrade to 1.8 version with glibc 2.27Richard Purdie2018-03-111-3/+3
| | | | | | | | | Now distros are starting to ship glibc 2.27 we need a uninatve version which contains glibc 2.27 which is in the 1.8 version. (From OE-Core rev: 0a1a1daac661046b0bf287b63267d58e0ab03e8e) Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* lsbinitscripts: update to 9.79Alexander Kanavin2018-03-112-13/+16
| | | | | | | | | | Switch to github as pkgs.fedoraproject.org is down. (From OE-Core rev: d3a6d7895f8f68042aa5b6c3ce0dcc915f330bd6) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* mklibs-native: refresh patchesAlexander Kanavin2018-03-111-12/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 7b1dfc0f67905435906ae806987e945134311045) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* attr: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-30/+22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 9a0465bd26a8359c8b432595589a13f295f2de2d) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* libunwind: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-13/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 268186429d10047796a4801baf95ae8a8f722658) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* libtiff: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-4/+4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 8d4dd42cf39ac33e2479cb4f9f833701d68cea62) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* cryptodev: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-21/+21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: cecd562742c94f223c92bf5426148967fc9a8054) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* blktrace: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-4/+12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 0666146a9f12c90e2b5f9fd3b03b21429fb9327c) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* xorg-xserver: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-6/+6
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 77fb72c76c8a5b2229a32f36a913a3293e9d2b56) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* acpica: remove unnecesary no-werror.patchAlexander Kanavin2018-03-112-33/+0
| | | | | | | | | | It became out of date (missing newly added files), and seems no longer necessary for builds. (From OE-Core rev: 54ca13f0dae8707a7fcbaa308dd797619defb823) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* mesa: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-112-19/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 0cff8ae54066b25ffbe1efaa3f0a1d84aa89ebe1) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* drm: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-14/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 625be3dd6e3069333a3c94ca8f23129b23e4425b) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* gtk-doc: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-10/+8
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 3277e60b6eefb3a1c858462bc89244f6577dca52) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* gnome: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-8/+5
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 9c762156d5eab1582fdd1f5000e80a0a67d46152) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* sysstat: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-10/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 53f2bbba35c63afa14c5fcb33b83b0ee061840ca) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* rpcbind: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-9/+6
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: df9b991d1f453aae4dca5558f10fd23e866778dc) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* newt: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-14/+12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 8820d4ffa493d49212f4d8f2665d15c7070a7477) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* net-tools: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-25/+22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 561e89baf77741dfa5af9c645f7c471cd7b3880b) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* ltp: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-112-56/+51
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 040b4bb125e28750e089f631c1debb088bb3bc9f) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* ethtool: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-4/+4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 93fca640e97643f94ef4f4a5d96c30c971058ec9) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* cups: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-9/+9
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 9f58bd731f33b90849d7d0cb8153dcfedf336ff4) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* tcf-agent: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-6/+8
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 9f77858360b33de6c4f66638fea8a8051fb6208f) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* ruby: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-10/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 44e650f961888b75797da8ecc23654f672c5fae6) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* qemu: drop already applied glibc-2.25.patchAlexander Kanavin2018-03-112-75/+0
| | | | | | | | | | Due to patch fuzz it was applied again in a different place. (From OE-Core rev: c1596c6a26bc099a5f27f8a7f9feb7d07bd30cd5) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* qemu: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-112-22/+16
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: a5c1069d2c0570186792d61151e1865642afd73a) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* python: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-116-168/+166
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 8a5c1328c4ea63443a92813c54bd2229c9959ff9) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* opkg-utils: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-112-16/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: ca733ba0e28d6d4c199e149ce8ae428397dfa51f) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* m4: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-5/+6
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 87118e6a2ed6da1ceaf484c326ec6d0ac8c1b8be) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* i2c-tools: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-14/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 00677e03156228f752476520911c19d4156db8da) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* gcc: drop patch that is already upstreamAlexander Kanavin2018-03-112-52/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: e3a50788bfeabbde226e280803a01dd7f765b2bc) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* e2fsprogs: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-112-21/+21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 6a83aca280fece30fd7c17f32f07f592f6300c6c) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* openssl: drop openssl-1.0.2a-x32-asm.patchAlexander Kanavin2018-03-112-47/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | 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 (From OE-Core rev: 325e516b59e677dc8e2c5756589fa8037b3e9392) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* openssl: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-112-12/+12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 7baba7a19c5610a63ccbfd6a2238667772b32118) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* iproute2: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-6/+6
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 3d33f83ffa8ba2a36a03489b16292d3132f0eb27) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* avahi: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-10/+16
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 6c0329389ffd82552c9302d70c8b2a1dfc94ce00) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* u-boot: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-7/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 7e8273cb55df71eaaf2cd50db076b73229ef7566) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* pcmciautils: drop duplicate chunk from pcmciautils-018/makefile_race.patchAlexander Kanavin2018-03-111-14/+0
| | | | | | | | | | The new rule was patched into the makefile twice. (From OE-Core rev: c52228f4d0711ab7d75f9f860f637c6351dccd63) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* pciutils: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-111-13/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: 7d56245a4859727f85dc5ae6f881d0783dee1ce1) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* devtool: add --force-patch-refresh to 'modify' and 'finish' commandsAlexander Kanavin2018-03-111-9/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This is very useful for updating patch context so that any fuzz is eliminated. Simply issue: devtool modify <recipe> devtool finish --force-patch-refresh <recipe> <layer_path> 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. (From OE-Core rev: 7e1d1887be8faaaab9996fca9a3fd750aeb7b62f) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* meta/lib/oe/patch.py: do not leave .orig files if a patch isn't perfectly ↵Alexander Kanavin2018-03-111-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: f4f3406c3bd9599d7a19275475d52bda4c42f2ab) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* liburcu: Explicitly add pthread options to cflagsKhem Raj2018-03-111-0/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | Some architectures e.g. riscv gcc does not add -D_REENTRANT when enabling pthreads. Help it here by adding these options while gcc gets fixed (From OE-Core rev: 784f4418259fe441060c134a7dcf305f4e0d4e2d) Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* recipes: Disable lttng for riscvKhem Raj2018-03-113-0/+4
| | | | | | | | (From OE-Core rev: 1e4e58d51498101e1e1b36fd4c3ad51052c15a6a) Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* packagegroup-core-sdk: Disable SANITIZERS for riscv64Khem Raj2018-03-111-0/+1
| | | | | | | | | | Dont build yet (From OE-Core rev: fa47b5e61839ae2f67f00998792a88726359af89) Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* e2fsprogs: Add comment on why touch is neededuninative-1.8Richard Purdie2018-03-091-0/+2
| | | | | | | | | Commit b32f3b655189fd89dcfce084b6fda0d379300f75 added this code but we could do with a commit so people realise why its there. (From OE-Core rev: e4da78229f0bd67fd34928eafe48dbdc9e8da050) Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* perl: remove perl-enable-gdbm.patchAlexander Kanavin2018-03-092-20/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | The change was already present in upstream, so we just applied it again (see bug 10450 for why). (From OE-Core rev: 549b52d6d16ff80f1adf246e69c3adcc792d1211) Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
* perl: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-098-68/+63
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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. (From OE-Core rev: ddb2be68c713361b1024b33080bf7c160337dbe1) 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> Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
generated by cgit v1.2.3-54-g00ecf (git 2.39.0) at 2024-11-16 19:03:52 +0000