[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn]

Patch failed!  Please fix linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch!
make: *** [buildroot/build_i486/linux-2.6.21.5/.patched] Error 1


Cheers,

-- 
Cristian

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn]

Preceeded by this:

Applying linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch using plaintext:
patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/Makefile
patching file scripts/gen_lzma_initramfs_list.sh
patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/lzma_misc.c
patching file scripts/Makefile.lib

Applying linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch using plaintext:
patching file MAINTAINERS
patching file Makefile
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:

> Patch failed!  Please fix linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch!
> make: *** [buildroot/build_i486/linux-2.6.21.5/.patched] Error 1

Conflicts between linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch and
linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch?


Cheers,

-- 
Cristian

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn]

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:

> Preceeded by this:
>
> Applying linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch using plaintext:
> patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/Makefile
> patching file scripts/gen_lzma_initramfs_list.sh
> patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/lzma_misc.c
> patching file scripts/Makefile.lib
>
> Applying linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch using plaintext:
> patching file MAINTAINERS
> patching file Makefile
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej
>
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
>
> > Patch failed!  Please fix linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch!
> > make: *** [buildroot/build_i486/linux-2.6.21.5/.patched] Error 1
>
> Conflicts between linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch and
> linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch?

Questions:

Is it really necessary to apply these patches? Even though .config shows?

# BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_TARGET is not set
# BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_HOST is not set
# BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2_LZMA is not set
# BR2_avr32 is not set
# BR2_TOOLCHAIN_ATMEL_AVR32 is not set

Wouldn't it be a good idea for each successfully applied patch to have a
target and a prequisite?

<patch name>: <patch name>.done

so that, if a patch fails and is fixed on the spot, remake skipps the
already applied patches?


Cheers,

-- 
Cristian

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Ulf Samuelsson]

> Patch failed!  Please fix linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch!
> make: *** [buildroot/build_i486/linux-2.6.21.5/.patched] Error 1
> 
I test built for an x86, but maybe only 2.6.22.1 got tested.
I will revert the patches, and recheck tomorrow.

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson  

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patchfailes

[Ulf Samuelsson]

>> Conflicts between linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch and
>> linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch?
> 
> Questions:
> 
> Is it really necessary to apply these patches? Even though .config shows?
> 
> # BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_TARGET is not set
> # BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_HOST is not set
> # BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2_LZMA is not set
> # BR2_avr32 is not set
> # BR2_TOOLCHAIN_ATMEL_AVR32 is not set
> 
> Wouldn't it be a good idea for each successfully applied patch to have a
> target and a prequisite?
> 
> <patch name>: <patch name>.done
> 
> so that, if a patch fails and is fixed on the spot, remake skipps the
> already applied patches?
> 

We are currently discussing the mess with separate patch strategies
for the kernel headers and the linux build.
I proposed that both the kernel-headers and the linux should use the same patch directories.
This is only the case, if the kernel-headers and the linux version are the same today.

A long term approach could be to keep the kernel-headers for pre 2.6.19 kernels only
and build the headers in the target/linux directory, with patches
divided into groups of patches which are or are not applied depending on 
menu configurations.

Typically you would have 
"core" patches              - always applied
"architecture" patches   - always applied if an architecture is selected
"board" patches            -  conditionally applied through a choice.

Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Bernhard Fischer]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:19:13PM +0200, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
>On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
>
>> Preceeded by this:
>>
>> Applying linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch using plaintext:
>> patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/Makefile
>> patching file scripts/gen_lzma_initramfs_list.sh
>> patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/lzma_misc.c
>> patching file scripts/Makefile.lib
>>
>> Applying linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch using plaintext:
>> patching file MAINTAINERS
>> patching file Makefile
>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
>> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej
>>
>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
>>
>> > Patch failed!  Please fix linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch!
>> > make: *** [buildroot/build_i486/linux-2.6.21.5/.patched] Error 1
>>
>> Conflicts between linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch and
>> linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch?
>
>Questions:
>
>Is it really necessary to apply these patches? Even though .config shows?
>
># BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_TARGET is not set
># BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_HOST is not set
># BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2_LZMA is not set

I do have lzma installed on my host so i do not need to build a separate
lzma for the host. Still i want to use a vmlinux that is lzma
compressed, so the linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch is needed
(vmlinux-lzma is a kernel-config anyway, so even if it is applied you
don't have to use it).
I don't know what that atmel patch is supposed to do. For anything but
atmel "boards" it should not be downloaded nor applied anyway.

># BR2_avr32 is not set
># BR2_TOOLCHAIN_ATMEL_AVR32 is not set

[Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch failes

[Ulf Samuelsson]

ons 2007-08-01 klockan 12:36 +0200 skrev Bernhard Fischer:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 10:19:13PM +0200, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
> >On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
> >
> >> Preceeded by this:
> >>
> >> Applying linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch using plaintext:
> >> patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/Makefile
> >> patching file scripts/gen_lzma_initramfs_list.sh
> >> patching file arch/i386/boot/compressed/lzma_misc.c
> >> patching file scripts/Makefile.lib
> >>
> >> Applying linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch using plaintext:
> >> patching file MAINTAINERS
> >> patching file Makefile
> >> Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
> >> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej
> >>
> >> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
> >>
> >> > Patch failed!  Please fix linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch!
> >> > make: *** [buildroot/build_i486/linux-2.6.21.5/.patched] Error 1
> >>
> >> Conflicts between linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch and
> >> linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patch?
> >
> >Questions:
> >
> >Is it really necessary to apply these patches? Even though .config shows?
> >
> ># BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_TARGET is not set
> ># BR2_PACKAGE_LZMA_HOST is not set
> ># BR2_TARGET_ROOTFS_EXT2_LZMA is not set
> 
> I do have lzma installed on my host so i do not need to build a separate
> lzma for the host. Still i want to use a vmlinux that is lzma
> compressed, so the linux-2.6.21.5-002-lzma-vmlinuz.01.patch is needed
> (vmlinux-lzma is a kernel-config anyway, so even if it is applied you
> don't have to use it).
> I don't know what that atmel patch is supposed to do. For anything but
> atmel "boards" it should not be downloaded nor applied anyway.
> 

Yes, once patching the kernel is configurable, this is the way to go.

> ># BR2_avr32 is not set
> ># BR2_TOOLCHAIN_ATMEL_AVR32 is not set
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at uclibc.org
> http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot