From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f180.google.com (mail-pd0-f180.google.com [209.85.192.180]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DB36D2FE for ; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 00:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pd0-f180.google.com with SMTP id p10so3671789pdj.11 for ; Sat, 09 Nov 2013 16:36:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=T/dQcDvwAjhA5ApCDqPyKDQpR/Edzle6T6LNX8LdsBQ=; b=vYVheEGa5ZvYorH7TPUf78PSZGzdDxw/2BF8gxgxRTj/4Hqw8Xz+QcIYZ9tuFtyh8T NBrgBpyDN52qOMKOoBsOs5/1lnyr4ho4y+Jc/8h5AjKOdT7LqYRPtAP91e0VNgjFYTIE GWXdgYG8FHspL8whLIppNNM6gvXFeJyG3z4lMFObGx3OIyLOU3RH8Yv5WHxLZVg9IJvL 3xYsH64lYGfbQk+FIzlHC9btANk7hlqCdNZVJ8b9AsI07e/xYwbHrZHb6NVRmFvcTd/c eWBegZqmDfCpLcNUXgnP0eV0JmEx/YOFIjqEZzmd6zYrX/1D287gCv+/ucZxP2HaxxVO IhUQ== X-Received: by 10.66.118.129 with SMTP id km1mr101816pab.127.1384043804284; Sat, 09 Nov 2013 16:36:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (60-242-179-244.static.tpgi.com.au. [60.242.179.244]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id zq10sm24658312pab.6.2013.11.09.16.36.41 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 09 Nov 2013 16:36:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <527ED3C9.6070608@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 11:31:05 +1100 From: Jonathan Liu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Khem Raj References: <1383511181-8005-1-git-send-email-raj.khem@gmail.com> <527DC9DE.6010306@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: [PATCH] syslinux: Upgrade to 6.02 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: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 00:36:42 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/11/2013 1:55 AM, Khem Raj wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Jonathan Liu wrote: >> On 4/11/2013 7:39 AM, Khem Raj wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj >>> --- >>> .../recipes-devtools/syslinux/{syslinux_6.01.bb => syslinux_6.02.bb} | 5 >>> ++--- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> rename meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/{syslinux_6.01.bb => >>> syslinux_6.02.bb} (94%) >>> >>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/syslinux_6.01.bb >>> b/meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/syslinux_6.02.bb >>> similarity index 94% >>> rename from meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/syslinux_6.01.bb >>> rename to meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/syslinux_6.02.bb >>> index 4438ea8..b4ba0ad 100644 >>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/syslinux_6.01.bb >>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/syslinux/syslinux_6.02.bb >>> @@ -9,9 +9,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = >>> "file://COPYING;md5=0636e73ff0215e8d672dc4c32c317bb3 \ >>> DEPENDS = "nasm-native util-linux" >>> SRC_URI = >>> "${KERNELORG_MIRROR}/linux/utils/boot/syslinux/6.xx/syslinux-${PV}.tar.bz2" >>> - >>> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "6945ee89e29119d459baed4937bbc534" >>> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] = >>> "83a04cf81e6a46b80ee5a321926eea095af3498b04317e3674b46c125c7a5b43" >>> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "5410b1c2614cc8375bfc92fe308ca5c8" >>> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = >>> "16027cbc1a7d18a48f3d26fbea771896d892cb43860b8d2f596baef7f2789b6e" >>> COMPATIBLE_HOST = '(x86_64|i.86).*-(linux|freebsd.*)' >>> # Don't let the sanity checker trip on the 32 bit real mode BIOS >>> binaries >> Note that syslinux 6.02 has a known bug which corrupts the superblock when >> used on BTRFS volumes due to ldlinux.sys exceeding 64000 bytes. >> It fixes booting memtest86+ with pxelinux though (see >> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5501). > > so it fixes one and regresses 1 and then for third one we can backport a patch > is btrfs volume issue a blocker ? if not I would say a v2 with > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/boot/syslinux/syslinux.git/commit/?h=firmware&id=4ac63b5ac412d54462e292daf65a309775bc0448 > applied would be good. > atleast it will give us more testing and time to find issues before > 6.03 comes out > >> Regards, >> Jonathan I don't know of anyone using BTRFS volumes in production. It's not a blocker for me at least. Regards, Jonathan