From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:46:55 +0100
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/2] iqvlinux: bump to version 1.2.0.3
In-Reply-To: <1373112436.78108.1518637053844.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br>
References: <20171215153830.4864-1-casantos@datacom.ind.br>
 <367239421.6256025.1513450988190.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br>
 <1833448217.6256112.1513453992880.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br>
 <20171217050554.5377c971@windsurf>
 <20180109105628.6bd70119@windsurf>
 <1044274388.21428.1515549369997.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br>
 <1165835580.151356.1518608286300.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br>
 <20180214133856.0b932d8a@windsurf.lan>
 <1373112436.78108.1518637053844.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br>
Message-ID: <20180214204655.3d13fc3f@windsurf.lan>
List-Id: <buildroot.busybox.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: buildroot@busybox.net

Hello,

+Yann in Cc.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:37:33 -0200 (BRST), Carlos Santos wrote:
> > From: "Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
> > To: "Carlos Santos" <casantos@datacom.ind.br>
> > Cc: "Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>, "Romain Naour" <romain.naour@gmail.com>, "buildroot"
> > <buildroot@buildroot.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 10:38:56 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/2] iqvlinux: bump to version 1.2.0.3  
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 09:38:06 -0200 (BRST), Carlos Santos wrote:
> >   
> >> >> In the end, did you get the chance to raise the issue of the tarball
> >> >> name with the upstream developers ?  
> >> > 
> >> > Thanks for reminding me of this issue. I just submitted a ticket:
> >> > 
> >> >    https://sourceforge.net/p/e1000/bugs/589/  
> >> 
> >> No love, so far. :-(  
> > 
> > I pinged on the bug report, just in case, but indeed, there isn't much
> > hope.  
> 
> So we cannot upgrade the package without some hack to like the one in
> 
>     https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/849230/
> 
> It works, but uses $(DL_WRAPPER), which should be opaque to recipes.

Either that, or we add explicit support for this in the package
infrastructure, but it's a bit annoying. Indeed, if you have several
files to download (in <pkg>_SOURCE, <pkg>_EXTRA_DOWNLOADS and
<pkg>_PATCH), specifying what destination file name should be used is a
bit tricky.

Yann, your thoughts ?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://bootlin.com