From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7dBo-0005G8-6Z for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 02:35:12 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p370X198031043; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 01:33:01 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 30611-07; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 01:32:54 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p370Wa4S030995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Apr 2011 01:32:43 +0100 From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer In-Reply-To: <4D9CA452.1020205@mentor.com> References: <95d636004deffc0d6473c67ee9b5ce62937dc085.1302050252.git.tom_rini@mentor.com> <4D9C78F5.1090808@mentor.com> <4D9C9E75.1060203@mentor.com> <4D9CA452.1020205@mentor.com> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 14:16:41 -0700 Message-ID: <1302124601.22904.88.camel@rex> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ncurses: Update to 5.9 X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 00:35:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 10:35 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > On 04/06/2011 10:26 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > >> On 04/06/2011 10:05 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > >>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > >>>> On 04/05/2011 11:18 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >>>>>> The previous 5.7 release was relatively close to 5.8 due to it bringing > >>>>>> in a patch to sync with upstream work-in-progress. We skip over the > >>>>>> 5.8 release and move to 5.9. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> there already are patches for 5.9 available too > >>>>> ftp://invisible-island.net/ncurses/5.9/ncurses-5.9.patch.gz > >>>> > >>>> Wrong link? That reverse applies to ncurses 5.9 release. But > >>>> regardless, is ncurses something we need to be tracking top of tree for? > >>>> It seems like we needed to for 5.7 since there had been a lot going on > >>>> without a release but that seems to have changed now. > >>>> > >>> > >>> those patches usually contain critical bug fixes including security updates > >>> so it will be of interest to keep track of it > >> > >> Well, it doesn't currently. And while I agree we need to do a good job, > >> everywhere, of keeping track of security updates, I don't think we > >> should move back to depending on a site that frequently removes patches. > >> > > > > yes. cache the patches like yocto did for 5.7 recipes > > That still leaves the problem of there not being a valid patch there at > the moment. And I still don't see why ncurses needs to be in the bucket > of recipes we track the scm for rather than relying on the latest stable > release. It sounds like these patches are more like tracking an SCM rather than a source of specific security patches or critical updates. I think it might be wise to note this location in the recipe as a comment (can someone please send an updated patch) but I don't think we should be including these patches by default, particular if upstream are making regular releases again. Cheers, Richard