[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Bernd Kuhls]

Upstream forgot to bump the internal version number to 2.9.5 during the
last update. Roland Franke sent me an e-mail about it before posting
to the buildroot mailinglist, in order to help the integration of this
patch into buildroot I am sending this patch formatted by git.

Signed-off-by: Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de>
Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
---
 .../libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch  | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch

diff --git a/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch b/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbcb1e6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+Fix version number of build files from libfuse to real version
+
+Bug was reported upstream: https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/10
+and will be fixed with the next release:
+https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/10#issuecomment-172380172
+
+Signed-off-by: Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de>
+[original post: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2016-February/154294.html]
+Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
+[added links to upstream bug report]
+
+--- a/lib/Makefile.am
++++ b/lib/Makefile.am
+@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
+ 	$(iconv_source)		\
+ 	$(mount_source)
+ 
+-libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:4 \
++libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:5 \
+ 	-Wl,--version-script,$(srcdir)/fuse_versionscript
+ 
+ if NETBSD
+--- a/lib/Makefile.in
++++ b/lib/Makefile.in
+@@ -367,7 +367,7 @@
+ 	$(iconv_source)		\
+ 	$(mount_source)
+ 
+-libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:4 \
++libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:5 \
+ 	-Wl,--version-script,$(srcdir)/fuse_versionscript
+ 
+ @NETBSD_TRUE at libfuse_la_LIBADD = -lperfuse -lpuffs
-- 
2.7.0

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 02/28/16 15:05, Bernd Kuhls wrote:
> Upstream forgot to bump the internal version number to 2.9.5 during the
> last update. Roland Franke sent me an e-mail about it before posting
> to the buildroot mailinglist, in order to help the integration of this
> patch into buildroot I am sending this patch formatted by git.

 All this explanation should have been below a --- because it doesn't belong in
the git history.

 Also, this doesn't explain what the real problem is, something like:

This will generate a library with the wrong library name.

 AFAIU this is anyway harmless, so I guess it can go into next.


> Signed-off-by: Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de>

 Bernd, you can't just add someone else's Signed-off-by.

 Roland, can you confirm that you sign off this patch (see [1])?

[1] http://developercertificate.org/


 With all that:
Reviewed-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be>

 Regards,
 Arnout

> Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
> ---
>  .../libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch  | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
> 
> diff --git a/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch b/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..bbcb1e6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
> +Fix version number of build files from libfuse to real version
> +
> +Bug was reported upstream: https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/10
> +and will be fixed with the next release:
> +https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/10#issuecomment-172380172
> +
> +Signed-off-by: Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de>
> +[original post: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2016-February/154294.html]
> +Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
> +[added links to upstream bug report]
> +
> +--- a/lib/Makefile.am
> ++++ b/lib/Makefile.am
> +@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
> + 	$(iconv_source)		\
> + 	$(mount_source)
> + 
> +-libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:4 \
> ++libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:5 \
> + 	-Wl,--version-script,$(srcdir)/fuse_versionscript
> + 
> + if NETBSD
> +--- a/lib/Makefile.in
> ++++ b/lib/Makefile.in
> +@@ -367,7 +367,7 @@
> + 	$(iconv_source)		\
> + 	$(mount_source)
> + 
> +-libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:4 \
> ++libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:5 \
> + 	-Wl,--version-script,$(srcdir)/fuse_versionscript
> + 
> + @NETBSD_TRUE at libfuse_la_LIBADD = -lperfuse -lpuffs
> 


-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Roland Franke]

Hello,
yes this patch will fix the version in the file for the installation as by 
the
sourch-code from original version 2.9.5 will install in the output with the
wrong version 2.9.4.
I also guess that i am have sign the patch regarding the given link.
And this is the first time that i am trying to do that by my self, so please
note that i am not complete knowing all the thinks what be need.

Best regards,
Roland Franke

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- 
From: Arnout Vandecappelle
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 4:54 PM
To: Bernd Kuhls ; buildroot at buildroot.org
Cc: Roland Franke
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version 
number

On 02/28/16 15:05, Bernd Kuhls wrote:
> Upstream forgot to bump the internal version number to 2.9.5 during the
> last update. Roland Franke sent me an e-mail about it before posting
> to the buildroot mailinglist, in order to help the integration of this
> patch into buildroot I am sending this patch formatted by git.

All this explanation should have been below a --- because it doesn't belong 
in
the git history.

Also, this doesn't explain what the real problem is, something like:

This will generate a library with the wrong library name.

AFAIU this is anyway harmless, so I guess it can go into next.


> Signed-off-by: Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de>

Bernd, you can't just add someone else's Signed-off-by.

Roland, can you confirm that you sign off this patch (see [1])?

[1] http://developercertificate.org/


With all that:
Reviewed-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout@mind.be>

Regards,
Arnout

> Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
> ---
>  .../libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch  | 33 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
>
> diff --git a/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch 
> b/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..bbcb1e6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/libfuse/0002-fix-libfuse-versionsnumber.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
> +Fix version number of build files from libfuse to real version
> +
> +Bug was reported upstream: https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/10
> +and will be fixed with the next release:
> +https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/10#issuecomment-172380172
> +
> +Signed-off-by: Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de>
> +[original post: 
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2016-February/154294.html]
> +Signed-off-by: Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de>
> +[added links to upstream bug report]
> +
> +--- a/lib/Makefile.am
> ++++ b/lib/Makefile.am
> +@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
> + $(iconv_source) \
> + $(mount_source)
> +
> +-libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:4 \
> ++libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:5 \
> + -Wl,--version-script,$(srcdir)/fuse_versionscript
> +
> + if NETBSD
> +--- a/lib/Makefile.in
> ++++ b/lib/Makefile.in
> +@@ -367,7 +367,7 @@
> + $(iconv_source) \
> + $(mount_source)
> +
> +-libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:4 \
> ++libfuse_la_LDFLAGS = -pthread @libfuse_libs@ -version-number 2:9:5 \
> + -Wl,--version-script,$(srcdir)/fuse_versionscript
> +
> + @NETBSD_TRUE at libfuse_la_LIBADD = -lperfuse -lpuffs
>


-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF 

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Bernd" == Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de> writes:

 > Upstream forgot to bump the internal version number to 2.9.5 during the
 > last update. Roland Franke sent me an e-mail about it before posting
 > to the buildroot mailinglist, in order to help the integration of this
 > patch into buildroot I am sending this patch formatted by git.

What is the practical impact of this? Is it purely cosmetical?

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Roland Franke]

>>>>>> "Bernd" == Bernd Kuhls <bernd.kuhls@t-online.de> writes:

>> Upstream forgot to bump the internal version number to 2.9.5 during the
>> last update. Roland Franke sent me an e-mail about it before posting
>> to the buildroot mailinglist, in order to help the integration of this
>> patch into buildroot I am sending this patch formatted by git.

> What is the practical impact of this? Is it purely cosmetical?

In the system (fli4l) we have fix filenames inside the system.
So how can we differ without correct filenames?
How should we know if there is the real version 2.9.4 or the version
2.9.5 will be used?
How should be known if changes between version 2.9.4 and 2.9.5
realy be installed?

So the result is more cosmetical for most users. But in situations you 
have more versions available for download, you should be sure to have 
an right version-number.

--
Bye, Roland Franke

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/libfuse: fix internal version number

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Roland" == Roland Franke <fli4l@franke-prem.de> writes:

Hi,

 >> What is the practical impact of this? Is it purely cosmetical?

 > In the system (fli4l) we have fix filenames inside the system.
 > So how can we differ without correct filenames?
 > How should we know if there is the real version 2.9.4 or the version
 > 2.9.5 will be used?
 > How should be known if changes between version 2.9.4 and 2.9.5
 > realy be installed?

 > So the result is more cosmetical for most users. But in situations you
 > have more versions available for download, you should be sure to have
 > an right version-number.

Ok, so in the context of Buildroot itself, it is purely
cosmetical. Thanks.

-- 
Venlig hilsen,
Peter Korsgaard