[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Paulius Zaleckas]

Hi,

As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:

git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75

Should I post patch series to the list?
I am waiting for your comments on my work!

BR,
Paulius Zaleckas

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[William Wagner]

On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>
> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>
> Should I post patch series to the list?
> I am waiting for your comments on my work!

Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work, 
depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.

One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there 
that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as 
separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.

Peter - what do you suggest should be the process for getting this in, 
most of it looks good but there are a few places where I think things 
can be improved. Should Paulius and I try to get a master repository 
that we both sign off on?

Will

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Wagner                                     will_wagner at carallon.com
Development Manager                      Office Tel: +44 (0)20 7371 2032
Carallon Ltd, Studio G20, Shepherds Building, Rockley Rd, London W14 0DA
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Paulius Zaleckas]

On 03/01/2010 05:04 PM, William Wagner wrote:
> On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>
>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>
>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>> I am waiting for your comments on my work!
>
> Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work,
> depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.

Fonts are the most boring part ;)

> One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there
> that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as
> separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.

Which changes are not related?
I have pushed two branches there. Master contains all my patches, while
x11r75 branch has only X11 related changes. However there is some changes like
XCB, but its newer version is required by X11R7.5.
The other problem with my change series is that it will break git bisect...

> Peter - what do you suggest should be the process for getting this in,
> most of it looks good but there are a few places where I think things
> can be improved. Should Paulius and I try to get a master repository
> that we both sign off on?

Double sign off sounds good. Don't hesitate and lets discuss all places
we can improve!

> Will
>

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[William Wagner]

On 01/03/2010 20:47, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
> On 03/01/2010 05:04 PM, William Wagner wrote:
>> On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>>
>>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>>
>>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>>> I am waiting for your comments on my work!
>>
>> Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work,
>> depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.
>
> Fonts are the most boring part ;)
>
>> One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there
>> that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as
>> separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.
>
> Which changes are not related?

I might be browsing gitorious wrong but it appears you have patches for 
devtmpfs, gdb and the autotools infrastructure in there.

As far as other changes I made a few more changes to xserver and a few 
other packages but it is perhaps easiest for me to submit patches once 
yours have hit the tree if people are prepared to do things like that.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Wagner                                     will_wagner at carallon.com
Development Manager                      Office Tel: +44 (0)20 7371 2032
Carallon Ltd, Studio G20, Shepherds Building, Rockley Rd, London W14 0DA
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Thomas Petazzoni]

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:08:18 +0000
William Wagner <will_wagner@carallon.com> wrote:

> I might be browsing gitorious wrong but it appears you have patches
> for devtmpfs, gdb and the autotools infrastructure in there.

It is likely a gitorious browsing problem, because I cloned the
git tree, and the x11r75 branch pointed by Paulius really only
contained changes to package/x11r7/.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Paulius Zaleckas]

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:08 AM, William Wagner
<will_wagner@carallon.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 01/03/2010 20:47, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
>>
>> On 03/01/2010 05:04 PM, William Wagner wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>>>
>>>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>>>
>>>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>>>> I am waiting for your comments on my work!
>>>
>>> Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work,
>>> depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.
>>
>> Fonts are the most boring part ;)
>>
>>> One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there
>>> that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as
>>> separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.
>>
>> Which changes are not related?
>
> I might be browsing gitorious wrong but it appears you have patches for
> devtmpfs, gdb and the autotools infrastructure in there.

You are definitely looking at the wrong branch.
Please look here:
http://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot/commits/x11r75

> As far as other changes I made a few more changes to xserver and a few other
> packages but it is perhaps easiest for me to submit patches once yours have
> hit the tree if people are prepared to do things like that.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Will Wagner ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? will_wagner at carallon.com
> Development Manager ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Office Tel: +44 (0)20 7371 2032
> Carallon Ltd, Studio G20, Shepherds Building, Rockley Rd, London W14 0DA
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hi Paulius,

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:35:34 +0200
Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@gmail.com> wrote:

> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
> 
> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
> 
> Should I post patch series to the list?

For me, having your git tree was enough.

Generally, it looks very good and I think it can be merged as is. I
appreciate the removal of all obsolete packages.

I have a few questions though :

 *) On many packages, but not all, you added FOOBAR_LIBTOOL_PATCH=NO.
    What has driven your choice of applying or not applying the libtool
    patch ?

 *) I imagine that all the patches you are dropping for the different
    packages have been merged upstream and are no longer needed ?

 *) I think the xf86-video-wsfb could just be removed. But this can be
    done later, if you don't want to rebase all your patch set.

 *) Concerning the dependency of xcb-util on gperf on the host, we have
    to decide whether gperf is a mandatory tool for Buildroot (in which
    case it should be added to toolchain/dependencies/dependencies.sh)
    or if we should build it, in which case, we need to add a
    host-gperf dependency.

 *) The xfont_font-util package should be fixed, as we discussed
    recently on the list. This post-install.sh script assuming that
    some tools are installed on the host is ugly. We must determine
    whether xfont_font-util should be built for the host, for the
    target or for both. But this can be done after merging your patch
    set, of course.

Thanks a lot for all this work!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[William Wagner]

On 02/03/2010 08:43, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hi Paulius,
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:35:34 +0200
> Paulius Zaleckas<paulius.zaleckas@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>
>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>
>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>>      
> For me, having your git tree was enough.
>
> Generally, it looks very good and I think it can be merged as is. I
> appreciate the removal of all obsolete packages.
>
> I have a few questions though :
>
>   *) On many packages, but not all, you added FOOBAR_LIBTOOL_PATCH=NO.
>      What has driven your choice of applying or not applying the libtool
>      patch ?
>    

This is the same problem I saw and posted about here 
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2010-February/032446.html. 
It looks like the package has a newer version of ltmain.sh (2.2.6). Not 
sure if it no longer needs the patch of if that version needs a 
different version of the patch. I found most xorg packages needed the 
change.

>   *) I imagine that all the patches you are dropping for the different
>      packages have been merged upstream and are no longer needed ?
>
>   *) I think the xf86-video-wsfb could just be removed. But this can be
>      done later, if you don't want to rebase all your patch set.
>    

I think there are a lot of drivers that could be dropped, most of the 
video drivers are for hardware that has not been made for years so could 
be removed or marked deprecated.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Wagner                                     will_wagner at carallon.com
Development Manager                      Office Tel: +44 (0)20 7371 2032
Carallon Ltd, Studio G20, Shepherds Building, Rockley Rd, London W14 0DA
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Paulius Zaleckas]

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi Paulius,
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:35:34 +0200
> Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>
>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>
>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>
> For me, having your git tree was enough.
>
> Generally, it looks very good and I think it can be merged as is. I
> appreciate the removal of all obsolete packages.
>
> I have a few questions though :
>
> ?*) On many packages, but not all, you added FOOBAR_LIBTOOL_PATCH=NO.
> ? ?What has driven your choice of applying or not applying the libtool
> ? ?patch ?

See  William reply about this. I believe libtool patch is not needed
here any more.

> ?*) I imagine that all the patches you are dropping for the different
> ? ?packages have been merged upstream and are no longer needed ?

Yes.

> ?*) I think the xf86-video-wsfb could just be removed. But this can be
> ? ?done later, if you don't want to rebase all your patch set.

I can remove it if you wish. Rebasing is not a problem for me.

> ?*) Concerning the dependency of xcb-util on gperf on the host, we have
> ? ?to decide whether gperf is a mandatory tool for Buildroot (in which
> ? ?case it should be added to toolchain/dependencies/dependencies.sh)
> ? ?or if we should build it, in which case, we need to add a
> ? ?host-gperf dependency.

I have no opinion on this. So I can fix it as you like :)

> ?*) The xfont_font-util package should be fixed, as we discussed
> ? ?recently on the list. This post-install.sh script assuming that
> ? ?some tools are installed on the host is ugly. We must determine
> ? ?whether xfont_font-util should be built for the host, for the
> ? ?target or for both. But this can be done after merging your patch
> ? ?set, of course.

I think we should deal with this later...

> Thanks a lot for all this work!
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
> Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
> development, consulting, training and support.
> http://free-electrons.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>

[Buildroot] X11R7.5 git branch

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Paulius" == Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@gmail.com> writes:

 Paulius> Hi,
 Paulius> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:

 Paulius> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75

 Paulius> Should I post patch series to the list?
 Paulius> I am waiting for your comments on my work!

Thanks, looks good - Pulled and pushed.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard