Closed
Conversation
algitbot
pushed a commit
to alpinelinux/aports
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2022
Include fixes from upstream PRs: madler/zlib#607 madler/zlib#599
algitbot
pushed a commit
to alpinelinux/aports
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2022
Include fixes from upstream PRs: madler/zlib#607 madler/zlib#599
algitbot
pushed a commit
to alpinelinux/aports
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2022
Include fixes from upstream PRs: madler/zlib#607 madler/zlib#599
algitbot
pushed a commit
to alpinelinux/aports
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2022
Include fixes from upstream PRs: madler/zlib#607 madler/zlib#599
algitbot
pushed a commit
to alpinelinux/aports
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2022
Include fixes from upstream PRs: madler/zlib#607 madler/zlib#599
sgunin
pushed a commit
to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in: https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status() to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py) * it finds one "new" issue in oe-core: Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch) * but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this: -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check: ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core] * RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust regexes in patchreview.py. Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
sgunin
pushed a commit
to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in: https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status() to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py) * it finds one "new" issue in oe-core: Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch) * but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this: -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check: ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core] * RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust regexes in patchreview.py. Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
sgunin
pushed a commit
to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in: https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status() to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py) * it finds one "new" issue in oe-core: Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch) * but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this: -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check: ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core] * RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust regexes in patchreview.py. Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
sgunin
pushed a commit
to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in: https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status() to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py) * it finds one "new" issue in oe-core: Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch) * but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this: -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check: ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core] * RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust regexes in patchreview.py. Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
shr-project
added a commit
to shr-distribution/oe-core
that referenced
this pull request
May 30, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in: https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status() to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py) * it finds one "new" issue in oe-core: Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch) * but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this: -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check: ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status : Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core] * RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust regexes in patchreview.py. Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
LDFLAGS can contain critical flags without which linking wont succeed therefore ensure that all configure tests involving link time checks are using LDFLAGS on compiler commandline along with CFLAGS to ensure the tests perform correctly. Without this some tests may fail resulting in wrong confgure result, ending in miscompiling the package Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Contributor
Author
|
@madler I have rebased this patch. adding LDFLAGS improves the situation especially for cross-compiling environments like Yocto. |
Owner
|
Applied. Thanks. |
|
Merged commit: |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
LDFLAGS can contain critical flags without which linking wont succeed
therefore ensure that all configure tests involving link time checks are
using LDFLAGS on compiler commandline along with CFLAGS to ensure the
tests perform correctly. Without this some tests may fail resulting in
wrong confgure result, ending in miscompiling the package
Upstream-Status: Pending
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.khem@gmail.com