[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Alexey Brodkin]

Hello,

This might be quite a na?ve and silly question but I'd like to understand
if some patches for Binutils are still really needed.

1. https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0002-ld-makefile.patch
This one I may track down to at least 2.15.94.0.2.2 here:
https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/toolchain/binutils/?id=c1f119b500b487dac34a730609e6a0f1c30f8bfd
Also from that patch I may conclude it came from Debian still no rationale why it was
created, what it fixe or improves...

But in OpenEmbedded they got rid of it long ago on switch to 2.26, see
https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded-core/commit/3c7fe424f850af70989ad682dd9c5be70cd02ca5

2. Same here: https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0003-check-ldrunpath-length.patch

3. This one is pretty much the same: https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0004-add-sysroot-fix-from-bug-3049.patch
And bug mentioned in this patch was "fixed" a long ago, see https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10340

Any thoughts?

-Alexey

[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Romain Naour]

Hi Alexey,

Le 19/10/2018 ? 14:24, Alexey Brodkin a ?crit?:
> Hello,
> 
> This might be quite a na?ve and silly question but I'd like to understand
> if some patches for Binutils are still really needed.
> 
> 1. https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0002-ld-makefile.patch
> This one I may track down to at least 2.15.94.0.2.2 here:
> https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/toolchain/binutils/?id=c1f119b500b487dac34a730609e6a0f1c30f8bfd
> Also from that patch I may conclude it came from Debian still no rationale why it was
> created, what it fixe or improves...
> 
> But in OpenEmbedded they got rid of it long ago on switch to 2.26, see
> https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded-core/commit/3c7fe424f850af70989ad682dd9c5be70cd02ca5
> 
> 2. Same here: https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0003-check-ldrunpath-length.patch
> 
> 3. This one is pretty much the same: https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0004-add-sysroot-fix-from-bug-3049.patch
> And bug mentioned in this patch was "fixed" a long ago, see https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10340
> 
> Any thoughts?

I believe we need to take a look at those old and non upstreamed patches.
It's the same problem with gcc package, the two first patches should be removed.

We can discuss about it during the meeting.

Best regards,
Romain

> 
> -Alexey
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
> 

[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:24:26 +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:

> This might be quite a na?ve and silly question but I'd like to understand
> if some patches for Binutils are still really needed.
> 
> 1. https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0002-ld-makefile.patch
> This one I may track down to at least 2.15.94.0.2.2 here:
> https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/commit/toolchain/binutils/?id=c1f119b500b487dac34a730609e6a0f1c30f8bfd
> Also from that patch I may conclude it came from Debian still no rationale why it was
> created, what it fixe or improves...
> 
> But in OpenEmbedded they got rid of it long ago on switch to 2.26, see
> https://github.com/openembedded/openembedded-core/commit/3c7fe424f850af70989ad682dd9c5be70cd02ca5
> 
> 2. Same here: https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0003-check-ldrunpath-length.patch
> 
> 3. This one is pretty much the same: https://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/binutils/2.31.1/0004-add-sysroot-fix-from-bug-3049.patch
> And bug mentioned in this patch was "fixed" a long ago, see https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10340
> 
> Any thoughts?

I don't have anything specific thought, but I share the general feeling
that the stack of patches we have on binutils should be
analyzed/revisited, as I'm also sure that a number of those patches are
no longer needed.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Alexey Brodkin]

Hi Thomas, Romain,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Petazzoni [mailto:thomas.petazzoni at bootlin.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 3:37 PM
> To: Alexey Brodkin <alexey.brodkin@synopsys.com>
> Cc: buildroot at buildroot.org; Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>; ARC Buildroot mailing list <arc-buildroot@synopsys.com>;
> Romain Naour <romain.naour@smile.fr>; Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
> Subject: Re: Legacy patches for Binutils?
> 
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:24:26 +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> 
> > This might be quite a na?ve and silly question but I'd like to understand
> > if some patches for Binutils are still really needed.
> >
> > 1. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.buildroot.org_buildroot_tree_package_binutils_2.31.1_0002-2Dld-
> 2Dmakefile.patch&d=DwIFaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=lqdeeSSEes0GFDDl656eViXO7breS55ytWkhpk5R81I&m=CY8nik3Tm93
> O8isZ-48ZTZZXFjySwIKdtEC36EnnaWs&s=zD8Ya-IfQBGEcRID7FsUMup6xUOXxagtv7TaB6JfVVM&e=
> > This one I may track down to at least 2.15.94.0.2.2 here:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.buildroot.org_buildroot_commit_toolchain_binutils_-3Fid-
> 3Dc1f119b500b487dac34a730609e6a0f1c30f8bfd&d=DwIFaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=lqdeeSSEes0GFDDl656eViXO7breS55yt
> Wkhpk5R81I&m=CY8nik3Tm93O8isZ-48ZTZZXFjySwIKdtEC36EnnaWs&s=OeEURDBE18QSXtmef-lNZsbHsaFmYtrXGeC-L5023L0&e=
> > Also from that patch I may conclude it came from Debian still no rationale why it was
> > created, what it fixe or improves...
> >
> > But in OpenEmbedded they got rid of it long ago on switch to 2.26, see
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_openembedded_openembedded-
> 2Dcore_commit_3c7fe424f850af70989ad682dd9c5be70cd02ca5&d=DwIFaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=lqdeeSSEes0GFDDl656e
> ViXO7breS55ytWkhpk5R81I&m=CY8nik3Tm93O8isZ-
> 48ZTZZXFjySwIKdtEC36EnnaWs&s=Lou90XS2s5qA4NzeqJSGi_PkRgDoNpcVELp4gT3lJz0&e=
> >
> > 2. Same here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__git.buildroot.org_buildroot_tree_package_binutils_2.31.1_0003-2Dcheck-2Dldrunpath-
> 2Dlength.patch&d=DwIFaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=lqdeeSSEes0GFDDl656eViXO7breS55ytWkhpk5R81I&m=CY8nik3Tm93O
> 8isZ-48ZTZZXFjySwIKdtEC36EnnaWs&s=YI9n1_ictMK820ddEwETzxc8wgvpGntsKkcmZuj8uxM&e=
> >
> > 3. This one is pretty much the same: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__git.buildroot.org_buildroot_tree_package_binutils_2.31.1_0004-2Dadd-2Dsysroot-2Dfix-2Dfrom-2Dbug-
> 2D3049.patch&d=DwIFaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=lqdeeSSEes0GFDDl656eViXO7breS55ytWkhpk5R81I&m=CY8nik3Tm93O8i
> sZ-48ZTZZXFjySwIKdtEC36EnnaWs&s=MFlW850c-1cjdjQqpZXVTWTS6b2KOlYIT_qRGvvCQVg&e=
> > And bug mentioned in this patch was "fixed" a long ago, see https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__sourceware.org_bugzilla_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-
> 3D10340&d=DwIFaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=lqdeeSSEes0GFDDl656eViXO7breS55ytWkhpk5R81I&m=CY8nik3Tm93O8isZ-
> 48ZTZZXFjySwIKdtEC36EnnaWs&s=txQm-D6mMYoEtxpjNbtSosbMMaLn4Q5J8sqn547r7UI&e=
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> 
> I don't have anything specific thought, but I share the general feeling
> that the stack of patches we have on binutils should be
> analyzed/revisited, as I'm also sure that a number of those patches are
> no longer needed.

Should I add this as a topic for the meeting?

-Alexey

[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:53:11 +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:

> > I don't have anything specific thought, but I share the general feeling
> > that the stack of patches we have on binutils should be
> > analyzed/revisited, as I'm also sure that a number of those patches are
> > no longer needed.  
> 
> Should I add this as a topic for the meeting?

The topics we write down for the meeting are more discussion topics.
Here I don't think there's much discussion needed: simply someone need
to look at those patches, their history, the binutils source code, and
decide if they are still needed or not. I don't think there is anything
controversial here.

However, the meeting is also a moment for hacking, so it's definitely
something you can pick up as a "fun" task to achieve during the
meeting :-)

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] Legacy patches for Binutils?

[Romain Naour]

Alexey, Thomas,

Le 19/10/2018 ? 14:55, Thomas Petazzoni a ?crit?:
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:53:11 +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> 
>>> I don't have anything specific thought, but I share the general feeling
>>> that the stack of patches we have on binutils should be
>>> analyzed/revisited, as I'm also sure that a number of those patches are
>>> no longer needed.  
>>
>> Should I add this as a topic for the meeting?
> 
> The topics we write down for the meeting are more discussion topics.
> Here I don't think there's much discussion needed: simply someone need
> to look at those patches, their history, the binutils source code, and
> decide if they are still needed or not. I don't think there is anything
> controversial here.
> 
> However, the meeting is also a moment for hacking, so it's definitely
> something you can pick up as a "fun" task to achieve during the
> meeting :-)

+1

Best regards,
Romain

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas
>