From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FD5EC433F5 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA1740B6A; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0xcaqQuaIGml; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBCC440B53; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432991BF5B3 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FFCA4167D for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tkos.co.il Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H5pgZh0RWGkR for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail.tkos.co.il (guitar.tkos.co.il [84.110.109.230]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 974BA40247 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:09:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tarshish (unknown [10.0.8.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.tkos.co.il (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BD0A440F29; Wed, 11 May 2022 13:08:34 +0300 (IDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tkos.co.il; s=default; t=1652263714; bh=LLASWrVPzUkBcrUVd33XEdRq9Qp6AEU/M83NblEHyVA=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:From; b=BttjCs3u7OBxdTb1X7/IL43XzCos6hL5x7yM/l87JNNc0HdwjLPmwhEfhQNFtD1k0 c72ASjFS2+LdMhOzVgTf+Mh40LyhUnQ1nlISklJ5+oVAK6tdlM0ERkXy7y34ZK1Zls 23x4d/128i87rIBs6M0A0uMOqQLGuxg1lWSkAXe4ZkC6fgslQiebalkuxteilbi6wx mmHTIYm3lmyX3+quIAwvzLEirtfsTdXmEmgf/KCQBT69vqwpWwHLzQI2cwoNfBqdIX DHc+dn+pVaWAKDy4TatmoJ973h0YH/J98QfC4zoWz1kfEWJ7nTFnPlG3G8PbGRCjT/ Dve3E+NWVboBw== References: <20220329145904.63900-1-andreynech@gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.1 To: Andrey Nechypurenko Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 13:06:16 +0300 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <878rr88joi.fsf@tarshish> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/cmake: bump version to 3.22.3 X-BeenThere: buildroot@buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Baruch Siach via buildroot Reply-To: Baruch Siach Cc: Alsey Miller , Thomas Petazzoni , buildroot@buildroot.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" Hi Andrey, On Wed, May 11 2022, Andrey Nechypurenko wrote: >> On 10/05/2022 17:20, Andrey Nechypurenko wrote: >> >>> I am just curious if the following patch will be accepted for the >> >>> upcoming release? >> >> >> >> What about bumping it to 3.23.1? >> > >> > At the time I submitted the patch (29.03), v.3.22 was the latest one. It >> > also fixes the bug I was facing. So it is good enough for me and definitely >> > better than v.3.18 currently used by Buildroot. If you would like to submit >> > another one for v. 3.23.1 it would be great. >> >> Up to now, we've always kept the cmake version in sync with the value of >> BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN (defined in support/dependencies/check-host-cmake.mk and >> updated every time there is a package that requires a specific newer version - >> like swift would, as mentioned by Alsey. > > In addition to the Swift package mentioned by Alsey, there could be custom > packages added by Buildroot users with external trees. This is what I am > currently doing. > >> What is the bug you were facing? > > Our custom package uses a feature which was buggy: > https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/18299 (it is also mentioned > in the submitted patch). This bug was fixed in CMake 3.20. > >> Perhaps backporting its fix is appropriate? > > If the proposed patch with v.3.22 does not introduce any regression, then I > personally do not see any reasons for backporting. 3.18 is two years old and > it might be beneficial to switch to a newer one. Backporting the cmake fix alone would not help hosts with cmake version 3.18 installed. With current BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN set to 3.18 Buildroot will not build the fixed cmake host package, but rely instead on the buggy host installed cmake. baruch -- ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il - _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot