| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Patches were applied incorrectly due to this, with security implications.
[YOCTO #10450]
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
|
|
Now distros are starting to ship glibc 2.27 we need a uninatve version
which contains glibc 2.27 which is in the 1.8 version.
(From OE-Core rev: 0a1a1daac661046b0bf287b63267d58e0ab03e8e)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Switch to github as pkgs.fedoraproject.org is down.
(From OE-Core rev: d3a6d7895f8f68042aa5b6c3ce0dcc915f330bd6)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 7b1dfc0f67905435906ae806987e945134311045)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 9a0465bd26a8359c8b432595589a13f295f2de2d)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 268186429d10047796a4801baf95ae8a8f722658)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 8d4dd42cf39ac33e2479cb4f9f833701d68cea62)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: cecd562742c94f223c92bf5426148967fc9a8054)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 0666146a9f12c90e2b5f9fd3b03b21429fb9327c)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 77fb72c76c8a5b2229a32f36a913a3293e9d2b56)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
It became out of date (missing newly added files), and seems no longer necessary for builds.
(From OE-Core rev: 54ca13f0dae8707a7fcbaa308dd797619defb823)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 0cff8ae54066b25ffbe1efaa3f0a1d84aa89ebe1)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 625be3dd6e3069333a3c94ca8f23129b23e4425b)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 3277e60b6eefb3a1c858462bc89244f6577dca52)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 9c762156d5eab1582fdd1f5000e80a0a67d46152)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 53f2bbba35c63afa14c5fcb33b83b0ee061840ca)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: df9b991d1f453aae4dca5558f10fd23e866778dc)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 8820d4ffa493d49212f4d8f2665d15c7070a7477)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 561e89baf77741dfa5af9c645f7c471cd7b3880b)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 040b4bb125e28750e089f631c1debb088bb3bc9f)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 93fca640e97643f94ef4f4a5d96c30c971058ec9)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 9f58bd731f33b90849d7d0cb8153dcfedf336ff4)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 9f77858360b33de6c4f66638fea8a8051fb6208f)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 44e650f961888b75797da8ecc23654f672c5fae6)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Due to patch fuzz it was applied again in a different place.
(From OE-Core rev: c1596c6a26bc099a5f27f8a7f9feb7d07bd30cd5)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: a5c1069d2c0570186792d61151e1865642afd73a)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 8a5c1328c4ea63443a92813c54bd2229c9959ff9)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: ca733ba0e28d6d4c199e149ce8ae428397dfa51f)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 87118e6a2ed6da1ceaf484c326ec6d0ac8c1b8be)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 00677e03156228f752476520911c19d4156db8da)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Due to patch fuzz, it was applied again, so the same code sequence was
repeated twice. Not sure if that caused any bugs, but certainly wasn't
the right thing to do.
(From OE-Core rev: e3a50788bfeabbde226e280803a01dd7f765b2bc)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 6a83aca280fece30fd7c17f32f07f592f6300c6c)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch was applied in a completely incorrect spot (due to fuzz),
no one noticed or complained. Meanwhile upstream says the issue
has been resolved differently:
https://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=3759&user=guest&pass=guest
(From OE-Core rev: 325e516b59e677dc8e2c5756589fa8037b3e9392)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 7baba7a19c5610a63ccbfd6a2238667772b32118)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 3d33f83ffa8ba2a36a03489b16292d3132f0eb27)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 6c0329389ffd82552c9302d70c8b2a1dfc94ce00)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 7e8273cb55df71eaaf2cd50db076b73229ef7566)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The new rule was patched into the makefile twice.
(From OE-Core rev: c52228f4d0711ab7d75f9f860f637c6351dccd63)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 7d56245a4859727f85dc5ae6f881d0783dee1ce1)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
This is very useful for updating patch context so that any fuzz is eliminated.
Simply issue:
devtool modify <recipe>
devtool finish --force-patch-refresh <recipe> <layer_path>
Without this flag, devtool will not deem the commits in the workspace
different to patches in the layer, even if the commits have different,
up-to-date context line in them.
(From OE-Core rev: 7e1d1887be8faaaab9996fca9a3fd750aeb7b62f)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
matching
Particularly, this was causing 'devtool modify' to erroneously add those
.orig files into commits. This was getting in the way, if the goal
was to amend/update those existing patches.
(From OE-Core rev: f4f3406c3bd9599d7a19275475d52bda4c42f2ab)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Some architectures e.g. riscv gcc does not add -D_REENTRANT
when enabling pthreads. Help it here by adding these options
while gcc gets fixed
(From OE-Core rev: 784f4418259fe441060c134a7dcf305f4e0d4e2d)
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
(From OE-Core rev: 1e4e58d51498101e1e1b36fd4c3ad51052c15a6a)
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Dont build yet
(From OE-Core rev: fa47b5e61839ae2f67f00998792a88726359af89)
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Commit b32f3b655189fd89dcfce084b6fda0d379300f75 added this code
but we could do with a commit so people realise why its there.
(From OE-Core rev: e4da78229f0bd67fd34928eafe48dbdc9e8da050)
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The change was already present in upstream, so we just applied it
again (see bug 10450 for why).
(From OE-Core rev: 549b52d6d16ff80f1adf246e69c3adcc792d1211)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: ddb2be68c713361b1024b33080bf7c160337dbe1)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: 0b25fcee333e6207a8596d26adfa65fec85c26df)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Drop backported 0001-BUG-fix-infinite-loop-when-creating-np.pad-on-an-emp.patch.
Drop 0001-BUG-fix-infinite-loop-when-creating-np.pad-on-an-emp.patch as
upstream is using os.path.basename() instead now.
License-Update: License.txt file was update to list licenses of individual components;
not all of them are 3-clause BSD.
(From OE-Core rev: c70d1c07e4e697156bd49c43e2cc800f3085b182)
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
The patch tool will apply patches by default with "fuzz", which is where if the
hunk context isn't present but what is there is close enough, it will force the
patch in.
Whilst this is useful when there's just whitespace changes, when applied to
source it is possible for a patch applied with fuzz to produce broken code which
still compiles (see #10450). This is obviously bad.
We'd like to eventually have do_patch() rejecting any fuzz on these grounds. For
that to be realistic the existing patches with fuzz need to be rebased and
reviewed.
(From OE-Core rev: a3221aa92fa4423da3b70b8d673cf68be08ad922)
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
|
Alexander Kanavin
Richard Purdie
Ross Burton
Khem Raj