From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (5751f4a1.skybroadband.com [87.81.244.161]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2DFB74510 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 07:44:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hex ([192.168.3.34]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-3) with ESMTPSA id w2U7i12v028693 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Mar 2018 08:44:03 +0100 Message-ID: <1522395841.11431.108.camel@linuxfoundation.org> From: Richard Purdie To: Hongxu Jia , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org, "Burton, Ross" Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 08:44:01 +0100 In-Reply-To: <77cd677d-8c26-9eac-1dae-22afa985f447@windriver.com> References: <20180330070529.2394.14955@do.openembedded.org> <77cd677d-8c26-9eac-1dae-22afa985f447@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2-0ubuntu3.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.3 at dan X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IOKclyBwYXRjaHRlc3Q6IGZhaWx1cmUgZm9yIFVwZ3JhZGUgNyBwYWNrYWdlcw==?= X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 07:44:08 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: " 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: ": > ... > 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