Re: ✗ patchtest: failure for Upgrade 7 packages

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, 2018-03-30 at 15:26 +0800, Hongxu Jia wrote:
> On 2018年03月30日 15:05, Patchwork wrote:
> > 
> > == Series Details ==
> > 
> > Series: Upgrade 7 packages
> > Revision: 1
> > URL   : https://patchwork.openembedded.org/series/11622/
> > State : failure
> > 
> > == Summary ==
> > 
> > 
> > Thank you for submitting this patch series to OpenEmbedded Core.
> > This is
> > an automated response. Several tests have been executed on the
> > proposed
> > series by patchtest resulting in the following failures:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > * Issue             LIC_FILES_CHKSUM changed on target libgpg-error 
> > but there is no "License-Update" tag in commit message
> > [test_lic_files_chksum_modified_not_mentioned]
> >    Suggested fix    Include "License-Update: <description>" into
> > the commit message with a brief description
> >    Current checksum
> > file://COPYING;md5=59530bdf33659b29e73d4adb9f9f6552                
> >      file://COPYING.LIB;md5=2d5025d4aa3495befef8f17206a5b0a1       
> >               file://src/gpg-
> > error.h.in;endline=23;md5=beae1e44d8d5c265d194760276033a7c         
> >             file://src/init.c;endline=20;md5=872b2389fe9bae7ffb80d2
> > b91225afbc
> >    New
> > checksum     file://COPYING;md5=59530bdf33659b29e73d4adb9f9f6552   
> >                   file://COPYING.LIB;md5=2d5025d4aa3495befef8f17206
> > a5b0a1                     file://src/gpg-
> > error.h.in;endline=23;md5=fc7423b56d5f7163a9a2acf9fe2f8d6b         
> >             file://src/init.c;endline=20;md5=872b2389fe9bae7ffb80d2
> > b91225afbc
> It already includes "License-Update: <description>":
> ...
> 1. License-Update: update years from 2003-2004 to 2001-2018,
>     and add a new line 'SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+'
> ...
> 
> Should I remove the starting "1. "?

Yes, the "1. " is why its not understanding what you added.

> 
> > * Issue             Patches not removed from tree
> > [test_src_uri_left_files]
> >    Suggested fix    Amend the patch containing the software patch
> > file removal
> >    Patch            avoid-host-contamination.patch
> >    Patch            mkdir-p.patch
> >    Patch            do-not-check-local-libpng-source.patch
> >    Patch            ghostscript-9.02-genarch.patch
> >    Patch            ghostscript-9.21-prevent_recompiling.patch
> >    Patch            ghostscript-9.16-Werror-return-type.patch
> >    Patch            cups-no-gcrypt.patch
> >    Patch            ghostscript-9.15-parallel-make.patch
> It already removes them from tree.
> Should I git format-patch without "-M"?

To be clear, these patches are all renamed. I think patchtest is
failing to understand the rename. Please continue to send with -M but
lets file a bug against patchtest to see if we can fix this issue. 

We could avoid the issue by not renaming patches.

Cheers,

Richard