Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH next 1/2] package/watchdogd: bump to version 3.5

From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
To: Joachim Wiberg <troglobit@gmail.com>
Cc: "Alejandro González" <alejandro.gonzalez.correo@gmail.com>,
	"Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	buildroot@buildroot.org
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH next 1/2] package/watchdogd: bump to version 3.5
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2021 21:59:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211204205921.GD472627@scaer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f7d1dfe-07c3-198f-3449-9179db0e385c@gmail.com>

Thomas, All,

On 2021-12-04 21:23 +0100, Joachim Wiberg spake thusly:
> On 12/4/21 9:04 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > On Thu,  2 Dec 2021 02:39:01 +0100
> > Joachim Wiberg <troglobit@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> This addresses the autobuilder failure for master as per 2021-11-27.
> >> The root cause was a name clash in a dependency, the libite library,
> >> clashing with the DirectFB LiTE library header files.  
> > Thanks, I've applied both to next, as indicated in the patch title.
> > However, in the commit log, you seem to indicate that it's fixing a
> > build issue in master. Could you confirm?

We've discussed this on IRC with Joachim, and it was my expectation that
the patches would be aimed at master, because they *do* fix an actual
build failure in master.

The reasoning for accepting the bump in master was that libite is only
ever used by watchdogd in Buldroot. Both packages are maintained
upstream and in Buildroot by Joachim, which is pretty fast at addressing
build issues.

> Very unfortunate name clash between include files in two packages.
> http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/185c753af2aa159b494b13f78b0826dddbe4aed6
> 
> However, I think it's highly unlikely they'll be enabled at the same
> time. My recommendation is to go for next and let 2021.11 out the door.

Even if that were true, it will still happen in our CI and thus cause
build failures, which creates noise and may hide other, more intersting
failures. Besides, once a package is in the tree, people are going to
use it.

DirectFB is often used in embedded, and watchdogd is a process
supervisor for embedded, and so it is not too far-fetched to see that
the two could be easily used on the same system. For real. We want to
avoid name-clashing for those.

So I would say that we should also apply them to master.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot