* [PATCH 0/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed @ 2014-10-08 12:16 Hongxu Jia 2014-10-08 12:16 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Hongxu Jia 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-08 12:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-core, mark.hatle, paul 1. vim local.conf ... PACKAGE_CLASSES ?= "package_ipk" IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " perl-modules" IMAGE_FEATURES += "package-management ssh-server-dropbear" ... 2. bitbake core-image-minimal 3. runqemu qemux86 4. ssh target opkg remove perl --force-removal-of-dependent-packages Expected result: perl removed successfully //Hongxu The following changes since commit 505a6b696ae990442de720e5e1135a3e44d5f75c: bitbake: fetcher: fix BB_STRICT_CHECKSUM datatype check (2014-10-06 16:09:53 +0100) are available in the git repository at: git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib hongxu/fix-opkg http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=hongxu/fix-opkg Hongxu Jia (1): opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed ...g_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb | 1 + 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-08 12:16 [PATCH 0/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-08 12:16 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 9:31 ` Paul Barker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-08 12:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: openembedded-core, mark.hatle, paul opkg remove perl --force-removal-of-dependent-packages ... Removing package perl-module-extutils-mm-dos from root... ... Removing package perl-module-extutils-mm-dos from root... You can force removal of packages with failed prerm scripts with the option: --force-remove No packages removed. Collected errors: * pkg_run_script: Internal error: perl-module-extutils-mm-dos has a NULL tmp_unpack_dir. * opkg_remove_pkg: not removing package "perl-module-extutils-mm-dos", prerm script failed ... While remove pkg with '--force-removal-of-dependent-packages', pkg may be added to remove list multiple times, add status check to make sure pkg only be removed once. [YOCTO #6819] Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> --- ...g_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb | 1 + 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..08433a9 --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +From 41425d67d3589b1912416a17f740d6407c7834f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> +Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 19:53:13 +0800 +Subject: [PATCH] libopkg/opkg_remove.c: avoid remove pkg repeatly with option + --force-removal-of-dependent-packages + +While remove pkg with '--force-removal-of-dependent-packages', +pkg may be added to pkgs remove list multiple times, add status +check to make sure pkg only be removed once. + +Upstream-Status: Pending + +Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> +--- + libopkg/opkg_remove.c | 8 ++++++++ + 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) + +diff --git a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c +index 34f9154..a225e41 100644 +--- a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c ++++ b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c +@@ -250,6 +250,14 @@ opkg_remove_pkg(pkg_t *pkg, int from_upgrade) + if ((parent_pkg = pkg->parent) == NULL) + return 0; + ++ /* While remove pkg with '--force-removal-of-dependent-packages', ++ pkg may be added to remove list multiple times, add status ++ check to make sure pkg only be removed once. */ ++ if (conf->force_removal_of_dependent_packages && ++ pkg->state_flag & SF_FILELIST_CHANGED && ++ pkg->state_status == SS_NOT_INSTALLED) ++ return 0; ++ + /* only attempt to remove dependent installed packages if + * force_depends is not specified or the package is being + * replaced. +-- +1.9.1 + diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb index 3dd7489..867ff7a 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ SRC_URI = "http://downloads.yoctoproject.org/releases/${BPN}/${BPN}-${PV}.tar.gz file://no-install-recommends.patch \ file://add-exclude.patch \ file://opkg-configure.service \ + file://libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch \ " S = "${WORKDIR}/${BPN}-${PV}" -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-08 12:16 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 9:31 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-11 9:42 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:17 ` Hongxu Jia 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Paul Barker @ 2014-10-11 9:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hongxu Jia; +Cc: OE Core On 8 October 2014 13:16, Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: > opkg remove perl --force-removal-of-dependent-packages > ... > Removing package perl-module-extutils-mm-dos from root... > ... > Removing package perl-module-extutils-mm-dos from root... > You can force removal of packages with failed prerm scripts with the option: > --force-remove > No packages removed. > Collected errors: > * pkg_run_script: Internal error: perl-module-extutils-mm-dos has a > NULL tmp_unpack_dir. > * opkg_remove_pkg: not removing package "perl-module-extutils-mm-dos", > prerm script failed > ... > > While remove pkg with '--force-removal-of-dependent-packages', > pkg may be added to remove list multiple times, add status > check to make sure pkg only be removed once. > > [YOCTO #6819] > > Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> > --- > ...g_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.2.2.bb | 1 + > 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch > > diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..08433a9 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg/libopkg-opkg_remove.c-avoid-remove-pkg-repeatly-with.patch > @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ > +From 41425d67d3589b1912416a17f740d6407c7834f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > +From: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> > +Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 19:53:13 +0800 > +Subject: [PATCH] libopkg/opkg_remove.c: avoid remove pkg repeatly with option > + --force-removal-of-dependent-packages > + > +While remove pkg with '--force-removal-of-dependent-packages', > +pkg may be added to pkgs remove list multiple times, add status > +check to make sure pkg only be removed once. > + > +Upstream-Status: Pending > + > +Signed-off-by: Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> > +--- > + libopkg/opkg_remove.c | 8 ++++++++ > + 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > + > +diff --git a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c > +index 34f9154..a225e41 100644 > +--- a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c > ++++ b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c > +@@ -250,6 +250,14 @@ opkg_remove_pkg(pkg_t *pkg, int from_upgrade) > + if ((parent_pkg = pkg->parent) == NULL) > + return 0; > + > ++ /* While remove pkg with '--force-removal-of-dependent-packages', > ++ pkg may be added to remove list multiple times, add status > ++ check to make sure pkg only be removed once. */ > ++ if (conf->force_removal_of_dependent_packages && > ++ pkg->state_flag & SF_FILELIST_CHANGED && > ++ pkg->state_status == SS_NOT_INSTALLED) > ++ return 0; > ++ > + /* only attempt to remove dependent installed packages if > + * force_depends is not specified or the package is being > + * replaced. > +-- > +1.9.1 > + Your solution looks fine but I'd prefer it to be solved a different way upstream. It should be possible to ensure that duplicates don't enter the removal queue in the first place by checking the return of pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) before calling pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) in opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs. This would keep the logic in opkg_remove_pkg clean. If you've got time to try this alternative solution could you let me know if it works. If so, send the patch to opkg-devel@googlegroups.com and I'll merge it upstream. If you're too busy I can have a look at this myself next week. Cheers, -- Paul Barker Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 9:31 ` Paul Barker @ 2014-10-11 9:42 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:17 ` Hongxu Jia 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Barker; +Cc: OE Core On 10/11/2014 05:31 PM, Paul Barker wrote: > Your solution looks fine but I'd prefer it to be solved a different > way upstream. > > It should be possible to ensure that duplicates don't enter the > removal queue in the first place by checking the return of > pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) before calling > pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) in opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs. > This would keep the logic in opkg_remove_pkg clean. > > If you've got time to try this alternative solution could you let me > know if it works. If so, send the patch toopkg-devel@googlegroups.com > and I'll merge it upstream. If you're too busy I can have a look at > this myself next week. OK, I will try the alternative solution. //Hongxu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 9:31 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-11 9:42 ` Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:17 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:26 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:27 ` Paul Barker 1 sibling, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Barker; +Cc: OE Core On 10/11/2014 05:31 PM, Paul Barker wrote: > Your solution looks fine but I'd prefer it to be solved a different > way upstream. > > It should be possible to ensure that duplicates don't enter the > removal queue in the first place by checking the return of > pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) before calling > pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) in opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs. > This would keep the logic in opkg_remove_pkg clean. The pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) could not work here. Because 'dependent_pkgs' is not global which contains all removed pkgs. The checking will filter duplicated pkg. //Hongxu > If you've got time to try this alternative solution could you let me > know if it works. If so, send the patch toopkg-devel@googlegroups.com > and I'll merge it upstream. If you're too busy I can have a look at > this myself next week. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 10:17 ` Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:26 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:27 ` Paul Barker 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Barker; +Cc: OE Core On 10/11/2014 06:17 PM, Hongxu Jia wrote: > On 10/11/2014 05:31 PM, Paul Barker wrote: >> Your solution looks fine but I'd prefer it to be solved a different >> way upstream. >> >> It should be possible to ensure that duplicates don't enter the >> removal queue in the first place by checking the return of >> pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) before calling >> pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) in opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs. >> This would keep the logic in opkg_remove_pkg clean. > > The pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) could not work here. > Because 'dependent_pkgs' is not global which contains all removed pkgs. > > The checking will filter duplicated pkg. > s/will/will not/ //Hongxu > //Hongxu > >> If you've got time to try this alternative solution could you let me >> know if it works. If so, send the patch toopkg-devel@googlegroups.com >> and I'll merge it upstream. If you're too busy I can have a look at >> this myself next week. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 10:17 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:26 ` Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:27 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-11 10:33 ` Hongxu Jia 1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Paul Barker @ 2014-10-11 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hongxu Jia; +Cc: OE Core [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 916 bytes --] On 11 October 2014 11:17, Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: > On 10/11/2014 05:31 PM, Paul Barker wrote: >> >> Your solution looks fine but I'd prefer it to be solved a different >> way upstream. >> >> It should be possible to ensure that duplicates don't enter the >> removal queue in the first place by checking the return of >> pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) before calling >> pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) in opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs. >> This would keep the logic in opkg_remove_pkg clean. > > > The pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) could not work here. > Because 'dependent_pkgs' is not global which contains all removed pkgs. > > The checking will filter duplicated pkg. > I've attached a patch which should apply to opkg v0.2.2 to show what I intended. Thanks, -- Paul Barker Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk [-- Attachment #2: 0001-WIP-Attempt-to-fix-duplicate-removal-of-dependent-pa.patch --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1123 bytes --] From b663a030db08fee1da4976436b58a7f1a19a551d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 10:23:45 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] WIP: Attempt to fix duplicate removal of dependent packages To: opkg-devel@googlegroups.com Signed-off-by: Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> --- libopkg/opkg_remove.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c index 34f9154..fb8ab52 100644 --- a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c +++ b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c @@ -117,7 +117,8 @@ opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs(pkg_t *pkg, abstract_pkg_t **dependents) if (dep_ab_pkg->state_status == SS_INSTALLED) { for (a = 0; a < dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->len; a++) { pkg_t *dep_pkg = dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->pkgs[a]; - if (dep_pkg->state_status == SS_INSTALLED) { + if (dep_pkg->state_status == SS_INSTALLED + && !pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg)) { pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); count++; } -- 2.1.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 10:27 ` Paul Barker @ 2014-10-11 10:33 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:37 ` Paul Barker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Barker; +Cc: OE Core On 10/11/2014 06:27 PM, Paul Barker wrote: > On 11 October 2014 11:17, Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: >> On 10/11/2014 05:31 PM, Paul Barker wrote: >>> Your solution looks fine but I'd prefer it to be solved a different >>> way upstream. >>> >>> It should be possible to ensure that duplicates don't enter the >>> removal queue in the first place by checking the return of >>> pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) before calling >>> pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) in opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs. >>> This would keep the logic in opkg_remove_pkg clean. >> >> The pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg) could not work here. >> Because 'dependent_pkgs' is not global which contains all removed pkgs. >> >> The checking will filter duplicated pkg. >> > I've attached a patch which should apply to opkg v0.2.2 to show what I intended. > > Thanks, > Here is my patch, and it could not work, I think we are doing the same thing: --- a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c +++ b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c @@ -118,8 +118,11 @@ opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs(pkg_t *pkg, abstract_pkg_t **dependents) for (a = 0; a < dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->len; a++) { pkg_t *dep_pkg = dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->pkgs[a]; if (dep_pkg->state_status == SS_INSTALLED) { - pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); - count++; + if (!pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg)) + { + pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); + count++; + } //Hongxu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 10:33 ` Hongxu Jia @ 2014-10-11 10:37 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-21 16:17 ` Paul Barker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Paul Barker @ 2014-10-11 10:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hongxu Jia; +Cc: OE Core On 11 October 2014 11:33, Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: > > Here is my patch, and it could not work, I think we are doing > the same thing: > > --- a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c > +++ b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c > @@ -118,8 +118,11 @@ opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs(pkg_t *pkg, abstract_pkg_t > **dependents) > for (a = 0; a < dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->len; a++) { > pkg_t *dep_pkg = dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->pkgs[a]; > if (dep_pkg->state_status == SS_INSTALLED) { > - pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); > - count++; > + if (!pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg)) > + { > + pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); > + count++; > + } > > //Hongxu My assumption was that duplicates were only being added during a single call to opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs, as on subsequent calls a package will no longer have state_status == SS_INSTALLED if it has already been removed. If my assumption is wrong, your original patch looks to be the best solution. Thanks, -- Paul Barker Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-11 10:37 ` Paul Barker @ 2014-10-21 16:17 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-22 22:43 ` Burton, Ross 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Paul Barker @ 2014-10-21 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hongxu Jia; +Cc: OE Core On 11 October 2014 11:37, Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> wrote: > On 11 October 2014 11:33, Hongxu Jia <hongxu.jia@windriver.com> wrote: >> >> Here is my patch, and it could not work, I think we are doing >> the same thing: >> >> --- a/libopkg/opkg_remove.c >> +++ b/libopkg/opkg_remove.c >> @@ -118,8 +118,11 @@ opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs(pkg_t *pkg, abstract_pkg_t >> **dependents) >> for (a = 0; a < dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->len; a++) { >> pkg_t *dep_pkg = dep_ab_pkg->pkgs->pkgs[a]; >> if (dep_pkg->state_status == SS_INSTALLED) { >> - pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); >> - count++; >> + if (!pkg_vec_contains(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg)) >> + { >> + pkg_vec_insert(dependent_pkgs, dep_pkg); >> + count++; >> + } >> >> //Hongxu > > My assumption was that duplicates were only being added during a > single call to opkg_remove_dependent_pkgs, as on subsequent calls a > package will no longer have state_status == SS_INSTALLED if it has > already been removed. If my assumption is wrong, your original patch > looks to be the best solution. > Hongxu's original patch applies correctly upstream and passes the opkg test suite. I'll merge this onto the opkg-0.2.x branch and so we can change Upstream-status to 'Backport'. Acked-by: Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> Thanks, -- Paul Barker Email: paul@paulbarker.me.uk http://www.paulbarker.me.uk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed 2014-10-21 16:17 ` Paul Barker @ 2014-10-22 22:43 ` Burton, Ross 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Burton, Ross @ 2014-10-22 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Barker; +Cc: OE Core [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 370 bytes --] On 21 October 2014 17:17, Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> wrote: > Hongxu's original patch applies correctly upstream and passes the opkg > test suite. I'll merge this onto the opkg-0.2.x branch and so we can > change Upstream-status to 'Backport'. > > Acked-by: Paul Barker <paul@paulbarker.me.uk> > Thanks Paul, tag added and merged to my MUT. Ross [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 817 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-10-22 22:43 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-10-08 12:16 [PATCH 0/1] opkg: fix remove pkg with --force-removal-of-dependent-packages failed Hongxu Jia 2014-10-08 12:16 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 9:31 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-11 9:42 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:17 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:26 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:27 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-11 10:33 ` Hongxu Jia 2014-10-11 10:37 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-21 16:17 ` Paul Barker 2014-10-22 22:43 ` Burton, Ross
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.