summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/meta
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
...
* 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>
* 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>
* python: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-097-81/+57
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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: 0b25fcee333e6207a8596d26adfa65fec85c26df) 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-numpy: update to 1.14.1Alexander Kanavin2018-03-095-102/+29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Drop backported 0001-BUG-fix-infinite-loop-when-creating-np.pad-on-an-emp.patch. Drop 0001-BUG-fix-infinite-loop-when-creating-np.pad-on-an-emp.patch as upstream is using os.path.basename() instead now. License-Update: License.txt file was update to list licenses of individual components; not all of them are 3-clause BSD. (From OE-Core rev: c70d1c07e4e697156bd49c43e2cc800f3085b182) 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>
* irda-utils: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-26/+38
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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: a3221aa92fa4423da3b70b8d673cf68be08ad922) 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>
* zlib: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-6/+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: 10ae328607511e7092a9e6f75c8f382b7e3dd27b) 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>
* util-linux: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-5/+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: 16c27f3bb7b99193a88949eb85f3a3da725f3a6c) 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>
* ppp: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-092-40/+46
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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: 9f2ce622866c9766dc861561671ebb3f1c407e0b) 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>
* syslinux: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-10/+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: 05b59a502a03b4077208b83a4823e2012146671a) 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>
* mtd-utils: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-14/+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: ee40781cc12d06912457316211a08ec65e059339) 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>
* intltool: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-6/+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: 1fa0faebd24740556816042f54d399baf84731b2) 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>
* automake: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-092-37/+36
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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: d29d95e627b2303b835a705cb7d55d1e41ddb0a7) 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>
* apt: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-095-33/+34
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 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: a70103a6e400caaa87e1d36a7e59be7f3059a3bb) 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>
* iptables: drop unnecessary patchesAlexander Kanavin2018-03-093-97/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | These were adding definitions for the second time (see bug #10450 for why) or adding an include that isn't anymore necessary for musl builds. (From OE-Core rev: bed5ea53c74c4b444b2145e7a83ca9fd44ea30ec) 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>
* tcp-wrappers: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-091-11/+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: 33f90716bc9890492cc04c4abfe5506f5555d06a) 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>
* parted: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-092-11/+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: fa3180007502affabbe57cb6366be18fbb9e94f8) 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>
* libpam: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-092-16/+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: 994e43acc67efeb33d859be071609daa844e9b77) 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>
* mdadm: refresh patchesRoss Burton2018-03-092-12/+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: 3c3f76677759156b8cd87659fb4fefb46eb87d13) 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 2024-07-06 18:56:36 +0000