From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Samuelsson Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 08:20:01 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] linux-2.6.21.5-003-atmel.1-avr32-updates.patchfailes References: <0707312150570.11633@somehost> <0707312154000.11633@somehost> <0707312209460.11633@somehost> Message-ID: <015801c7d404$0f9291d0$dcc4af0a@atmel.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >> 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? > > : .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