* [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
@ 2011-10-21 6:42 Mats Kärrman
2011-10-21 10:16 ` Paul Menzel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mats Kärrman @ 2011-10-21 6:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Hi,
My first patch, please be gentle if i did something wrong ;)
The following patch is from a local branch tracking 2011.03-maintenance, should it be done different?
The binutils_2.18 tarball from GNU has changed checksums, ref. to this<http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/recipes/binutils/binutils_2.18.bb?h=2011.03-maintenance&id=bc8ddbf7944f82383936d88379619aa46c3954a2>
As binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb includes binutils_2.18.bb it does not need to specify its own checksums.
diff --git a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
index 837ebbe..2f13b26 100644
--- a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
+++ b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
@@ -1,6 +1,3 @@
require binutils_${PV}.bb
require binutils-cross-sdk.inc
PR = "${INC_PR}.1"
-
-SRC_URI[md5sum] = "9d22ee4dafa3a194457caf4706f9cf01"
-SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "487a33a452f0edcf1f8bb8fc23dff5c7a82edec3f3f8b65632b6c945e961ee9b"
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
2011-10-21 6:42 [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb Mats Kärrman
@ 2011-10-21 10:16 ` Paul Menzel
2011-10-21 15:05 ` Ulf Samuelsson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Menzel @ 2011-10-21 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1791 bytes --]
Dear Mats,
Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 06:42 +0000 schrieb Mats Kärrman:
> My first patch, please be gentle if i did something wrong ;)
our commit policy describes how patches should be formatted [1][2]. Most
importantly you forgot your Signed-off-by line.
> The following patch is from a local branch tracking
> 2011.03-maintenance, should it be done different?
If I read [3] correctly it first has to go into for example the master
branch. I pushed a similar hopefully correct change there [4]. Please
send a pull request as described in [3] to get that included in
2011.03-maintenance.
> The binutils_2.18 tarball from GNU has changed checksums, ref. to this<http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/recipes/binutils/binutils_2.18.bb?h=2011.03-maintenance&id=bc8ddbf7944f82383936d88379619aa46c3954a2>
> As binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb includes binutils_2.18.bb it does not need to specify its own checksums.
>
> diff --git a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
> index 837ebbe..2f13b26 100644
> --- a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
> +++ b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
> @@ -1,6 +1,3 @@
> require binutils_${PV}.bb
> require binutils-cross-sdk.inc
> PR = "${INC_PR}.1"
> -
> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "9d22ee4dafa3a194457caf4706f9cf01"
> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "487a33a452f0edcf1f8bb8fc23dff5c7a82edec3f3f8b65632b6c945e961ee9b"
Thanks and I am looking forward to further contributions,
Paul
[1] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Policy
[2] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Category:Policy
[3] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/2011.03-maintenance
[4] http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?id=f2d53aa074d76509384e7bb8a9c39e2e27210f4a
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
2011-10-21 10:16 ` Paul Menzel
@ 2011-10-21 15:05 ` Ulf Samuelsson
2011-10-21 18:04 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2011-10-21 20:45 ` Paul Menzel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ulf Samuelsson @ 2011-10-21 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel
2011-10-21 12:16, Paul Menzel skrev:
> Dear Mats,
>
>
> Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 06:42 +0000 schrieb Mats Kärrman:
>
>> My first patch, please be gentle if i did something wrong ;)
> our commit policy describes how patches should be formatted [1][2]. Most
> importantly you forgot your Signed-off-by line.
>
>> The following patch is from a local branch tracking
>> 2011.03-maintenance, should it be done different?
I did a similar fix for binutils-2.20.1, and that is apparently not the way
so this was rejected. (See other discussions on binutils this week).
I sent a new version of binutils-2.20.1 patch today,
which is taken from openembedded-core, and that
combines the new checksums, with downloading a new tarball.
If it follows the same scheme, then:
binutils-2.18.tar.bz2 is only a link to binutils-2.18a.tar.bz2
Your SRC_URI should be pointing at binutils-${PV}a.tar.bz2
> If I read [3] correctly it first has to go into for example the master
> branch. I pushed a similar hopefully correct change there [4]. Please
> send a pull request as described in [3] to get that included in
> 2011.03-maintenance.
>
>> The binutils_2.18 tarball from GNU has changed checksums, ref. to this<http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/recipes/binutils/binutils_2.18.bb?h=2011.03-maintenance&id=bc8ddbf7944f82383936d88379619aa46c3954a2>
>> As binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb includes binutils_2.18.bb it does not need to specify its own checksums.
>>
>> diff --git a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>> index 837ebbe..2f13b26 100644
>> --- a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>> +++ b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>> @@ -1,6 +1,3 @@
>> require binutils_${PV}.bb
>> require binutils-cross-sdk.inc
>> PR = "${INC_PR}.1"
>> -
>> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "9d22ee4dafa3a194457caf4706f9cf01"
>> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "487a33a452f0edcf1f8bb8fc23dff5c7a82edec3f3f8b65632b6c945e961ee9b"
>
> Thanks and I am looking forward to further contributions,
>
> Paul
>
>
> [1] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Policy
> [2] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Category:Policy
> [3] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/2011.03-maintenance
> [4] http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?id=f2d53aa074d76509384e7bb8a9c39e2e27210f4a
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
--
Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
2011-10-21 15:05 ` Ulf Samuelsson
@ 2011-10-21 18:04 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2011-10-21 20:45 ` Paul Menzel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Denys Dmytriyenko @ 2011-10-21 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 05:05:03PM +0200, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
> 2011-10-21 12:16, Paul Menzel skrev:
>> Dear Mats,
>>
>>
>> Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 06:42 +0000 schrieb Mats K?rrman:
>>
>>> My first patch, please be gentle if i did something wrong ;)
>> our commit policy describes how patches should be formatted [1][2]. Most
>> importantly you forgot your Signed-off-by line.
>>
>>> The following patch is from a local branch tracking
>>> 2011.03-maintenance, should it be done different?
> I did a similar fix for binutils-2.20.1, and that is apparently not the way
> so this was rejected. (See other discussions on binutils this week).
Ulf,
You did not read the issue description carefully. There is a genuine issue
with "overwriting" checksums incorrectly in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
> I sent a new version of binutils-2.20.1 patch today,
> which is taken from openembedded-core, and that
> combines the new checksums, with downloading a new tarball.
That is a correct way of solving the changed checksum issue. Thanks for
submitting your patches.
> If it follows the same scheme, then:
> binutils-2.18.tar.bz2 is only a link to binutils-2.18a.tar.bz2
> Your SRC_URI should be pointing at binutils-${PV}a.tar.bz2
That is a problem for binutils_2.18.bb and he is fixing a slightly different
problem in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
--
Denys
>> If I read [3] correctly it first has to go into for example the master
>> branch. I pushed a similar hopefully correct change there [4]. Please
>> send a pull request as described in [3] to get that included in
>> 2011.03-maintenance.
>>
>>> The binutils_2.18 tarball from GNU has changed checksums, ref. to
>>> this<http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/recipes/binutils/binutils_2.18.bb?h=2011.03-maintenance&id=bc8ddbf7944f82383936d88379619aa46c3954a2>
>>> As binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb includes binutils_2.18.bb it does not need
>>> to specify its own checksums.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>>> b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>>> index 837ebbe..2f13b26 100644
>>> --- a/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>>> +++ b/recipes/binutils/binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
>>> @@ -1,6 +1,3 @@
>>> require binutils_${PV}.bb
>>> require binutils-cross-sdk.inc
>>> PR = "${INC_PR}.1"
>>> -
>>> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "9d22ee4dafa3a194457caf4706f9cf01"
>>> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
>>> "487a33a452f0edcf1f8bb8fc23dff5c7a82edec3f3f8b65632b6c945e961ee9b"
>>
>> Thanks and I am looking forward to further contributions,
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Policy
>> [2] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Category:Policy
>> [3] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/2011.03-maintenance
>> [4]
>> http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?id=f2d53aa074d76509384e7bb8a9c39e2e27210f4a
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-devel mailing list
>> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Ulf Samuelsson
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
2011-10-21 15:05 ` Ulf Samuelsson
2011-10-21 18:04 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
@ 2011-10-21 20:45 ` Paul Menzel
2011-10-21 21:08 ` Mats Kärrman
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Menzel @ 2011-10-21 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1642 bytes --]
Dear Ulf,
Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Ulf Samuelsson:
> 2011-10-21 12:16, Paul Menzel skrev:
> > Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 06:42 +0000 schrieb Mats Kärrman:
> >
> >> My first patch, please be gentle if i did something wrong ;)
> > our commit policy describes how patches should be formatted [1][2]. Most
> > importantly you forgot your Signed-off-by line.
> >
> >> The following patch is from a local branch tracking
> >> 2011.03-maintenance, should it be done different?
> I did a similar fix for binutils-2.20.1, and that is apparently not the way
> so this was rejected. (See other discussions on binutils this week).
>
> I sent a new version of binutils-2.20.1 patch today,
> which is taken from openembedded-core, and that
> combines the new checksums, with downloading a new tarball.
>
> If it follows the same scheme, then:
> binutils-2.18.tar.bz2 is only a link to binutils-2.18a.tar.bz2
> Your SRC_URI should be pointing at binutils-${PV}a.tar.bz2
you describe indeed the correct fix. Unfortunately the “wrong” fix was
already committed so I just continued on this track. I also noted that
in my commit message.
Ulf thank you for the correct fix for 2.20.1 and Mats, if you have some
time it would be great if you could send a patch for what Ulf proposed.
[…]
Thanks,
Paul
> > [1] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Policy
> > [2] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Category:Policy
> > [3] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/2011.03-maintenance
> > [4] http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?id=f2d53aa074d76509384e7bb8a9c39e2e27210f4a
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
2011-10-21 20:45 ` Paul Menzel
@ 2011-10-21 21:08 ` Mats Kärrman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mats Kärrman @ 2011-10-21 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Paul,
I think Denys is correct in saying that "my" fix is a fix to a slightly different problem (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/48425) . The way the included binutils_2.18.bb was fixed may be wrong and require an additional fix though. I'll look into this.
BR // Mats
________________________________________
From: openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org [openembedded-devel-bounces@lists.openembedded.org] on behalf of Paul Menzel [paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net]
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 10:45 PM
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb
Dear Ulf,
Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Ulf Samuelsson:
> 2011-10-21 12:16, Paul Menzel skrev:
> > Am Freitag, den 21.10.2011, 06:42 +0000 schrieb Mats Kärrman:
> >
> >> My first patch, please be gentle if i did something wrong ;)
> > our commit policy describes how patches should be formatted [1][2]. Most
> > importantly you forgot your Signed-off-by line.
> >
> >> The following patch is from a local branch tracking
> >> 2011.03-maintenance, should it be done different?
> I did a similar fix for binutils-2.20.1, and that is apparently not the way
> so this was rejected. (See other discussions on binutils this week).
>
> I sent a new version of binutils-2.20.1 patch today,
> which is taken from openembedded-core, and that
> combines the new checksums, with downloading a new tarball.
>
> If it follows the same scheme, then:
> binutils-2.18.tar.bz2 is only a link to binutils-2.18a.tar.bz2
> Your SRC_URI should be pointing at binutils-${PV}a.tar.bz2
you describe indeed the correct fix. Unfortunately the “wrong” fix was
already committed so I just continued on this track. I also noted that
in my commit message.
Ulf thank you for the correct fix for 2.20.1 and Mats, if you have some
time it would be great if you could send a patch for what Ulf proposed.
[…]
Thanks,
Paul
> > [1] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Policy
> > [2] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Category:Policy
> > [3] http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/2011.03-maintenance
> > [4] http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded/commit/?id=f2d53aa074d76509384e7bb8a9c39e2e27210f4a
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-10-21 21:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-10-21 6:42 [PATCH] 2011.03-maintenance: Bad checksums in binutils-cross-sdk_2.18.bb Mats Kärrman
2011-10-21 10:16 ` Paul Menzel
2011-10-21 15:05 ` Ulf Samuelsson
2011-10-21 18:04 ` Denys Dmytriyenko
2011-10-21 20:45 ` Paul Menzel
2011-10-21 21:08 ` Mats Kärrman
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.