Re: [PATCH 1/2] libarchive update to 2.8.5

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 17:21 +0800, Xiaofeng Yan wrote:
> From: Xiaofeng Yan <xiaofeng.yan@windriver.com>
> 
> Modify md5 sum justly
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xiaofeng Yan <xiaofeng.yan@windriver.com>
> ---
>  .../libarchive/libarchive_2.8.5.bb                 |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 meta/recipes-extended/libarchive/libarchive_2.8.5.bb
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-extended/libarchive/libarchive_2.8.5.bb b/meta/recipes-extended/libarchive/libarchive_2.8.5.bb
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..1bc49e2
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/meta/recipes-extended/libarchive/libarchive_2.8.5.bb
> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
> +DESCRIPTION = "C library and command-line tools for reading and writing tar, cpio, zip, ISO, and other archive formats"
> +HOMEPAGE = "http://code.google.com/p/libarchive/"
> +SECTION = "devel"
> +LICENSE = "BSD"
> +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=4255e2e6f0349a4ac8fbd68459296e46"
> +PR = "r0"
> +
> +DEPENDS = "libxml2"
> +
> +# We need to repack the tarball due undistributable content on the upstream one.
> +# More details at http://code.google.com/p/libarchive/issues/detail?id=162
> +SRC_URI = "http://libarchive.googlecode.com/files/libarchive-${PV}.tar.gz \
> +           file://0001-Patch-from-upstream-revision-1990.patch \
> +           file://0002-Patch-from-upstream-revision-1991.patch \
> +           file://0004-Patch-from-upstream-rev-2514.patch \
> +           file://0005-Patch-from-upstream-rev-2520.patch \
> +           file://0006-Patch-from-upstream-rev-2521.patch \
> +           file://0007-Ignore-ENOSYS-error-when-setting-up-xattrs.-Closes-5.patch \
> +           "
> +
> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "9caf51dcf6213e9c9f5a1c27448b9c90"
> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "13993e0ffbd121ccda46ea226b1f8eac218de0fa8da7d8b1f998093d5c32a72d"
> +
> +inherit autotools lib_package
> +
> +BBCLASSEXTEND = "nativesdk"

Why do we still need libarchive 2.8.4 ?

Was the licence issue with the 2.8.4 tarball fixed in 2.8.5?

Cheers,

Richard