From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f173.google.com (mail-io0-f173.google.com [209.85.223.173]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C31071CBF for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 17:18:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f173.google.com with SMTP id g6so32670567ioj.1 for ; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 09:18:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9VXpKHe3caIVvVKrAcs1x3Ifkq1dF7Fljmn9c6ezDWE=; b=xK4Vy6m7Vq5DbWtlHQgbh0nlhp08LPo1kK6hhjVaHgb2B21OsgHEc+jkF26QmGIDwa QlROaZn1gK9JplE6ADJRkLLWZiFweQemsWMosXsh8TdkCDyp5fKu+bRV/07B6SssS6X9 +09ROrsfr6jWZdSi4uHVL5/zaJI36gE/RYOB8iy2M4Y5woOGa9bo+ne48yGgPHxlm5n3 tWuBa1a6KCdrs6VzS8tI2kYmBkmPqLyDkVsXHF85wr2zodvklt4Sr2obrgbDln1nDMW0 jEXluDdEtR4HhsCZhMBEarGMxV39ka4EUlP9mUgef0AwL502+dGAMlxcefcD+cGLIKbC l6dg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9VXpKHe3caIVvVKrAcs1x3Ifkq1dF7Fljmn9c6ezDWE=; b=kXpD4mR69/EmhavoOaPzNQp1Cdhrv8S3I4gp1y3TONirnQMy3yZ9CpMj4z7U33OnCP 56JDDeDYjI/BRidXJLyoe/pxJG0KnX3Q4E2+uDcVYtLcUKbs++zxhhb2uW7mszN4I2yN 0pCcqvaQHGhlXdjlcFylGnWhvkRc2lpTsXu9jyixwKLz6Otk8DQb+QCq1CVuMpHrCJ35 5C8aqrOv6Ra4KrJj53bGr4yvfYsm0e74+tY1Bv+4SUc6Zsi5WH63Kmxie/vRcCYsovb+ eHpLO6yMrFyq0Kfjcy7XOfXQI8Msh8dcA23Mk3n0cBVoq0kjy13KajpTqOBiHMbkcqSb HpSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nAPb+V4KKEkq05hJfcBtlEepBkJHKn0KQNkCjsCA4nxm+cpJCAcgvJMoCss0fgsZS8 X-Received: by 10.107.17.199 with SMTP id 68mr12294938ior.127.1489079890079; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 09:18:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8D47C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.212.124]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y7sm9372552itc.27.2017.03.09.09.18.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Mar 2017 09:18:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1489079885.7785.371.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9?= Bollo Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 18:18:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20170309174815.056bc5a2@d-jobol.iot.bzh> References: <20170309140706.19814-1-jobol@nonadev.net> <1489075674.7785.368.camel@intel.com> <20170309174815.056bc5a2@d-jobol.iot.bzh> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9?= Bollo , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] shadow: 'useradd' copies root's extended attributes X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list 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, 09 Mar 2017 17:18:10 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Thu, 2017-03-09 at 17:48 +0100, José Bollo wrote: > On Thu, 09 Mar 2017 17:07:54 +0100 > Patrick Ohly wrote: > > Can't you reorder and rebase the patches so that this > > 0001-useradd.c-create-parent-directories-when-necessary.patch applies > > on top of the patch which was submitted upstream? > > I agree that it would be better to reorder. Better but less > conservative because an existing patch must be upgraded. If upstream merges the proposed patch, then rebasing will be inevitable at some point, so we might as well do the cleaner solution now, even if the diff becomes larger. > > "devtool modify shadow-native" might be useful for that. "git rebase > > -i" in workspace/sources/shadow-native", then finish with "devtool > > update-recipe shadow-native". I haven't tried whether "update-recipe" > > handles re-ordering patches. If it doesn't, just fix it manually. > > I'll do and propose the new version soon. Thanks! -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.