[OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] ncurses: Update to 5.9

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 10:26 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/06/2011 10:05 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 04/05/2011 11:18 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> The previous 5.7 release was relatively close to 5.8 due to it bringing
>>>>>>> in a patch to sync with upstream work-in-progress.  We skip over the
>>>>>>> 5.8 release and move to 5.9.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> there already are patches for 5.9 available too
>>>>>> ftp://invisible-island.net/ncurses/5.9/ncurses-5.9.patch.gz
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong link?  That reverse applies to ncurses 5.9 release. But
>>>>> regardless, is ncurses something we need to be tracking top of tree for?
>>>>>  It seems like we needed to for 5.7 since there had been a lot going on
>>>>> without a release but that seems to have changed now.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> those patches usually contain critical bug fixes including security updates
>>>> so it will be of interest to keep track of it
>>>
>>> Well, it doesn't currently.  And while I agree we need to do a good job,
>>> everywhere, of keeping track of security updates, I don't think we
>>> should move back to depending on a site that frequently removes patches.
>>>
>>
>> yes. cache the patches like yocto did for 5.7 recipes
>
> That still leaves the problem of there not being a valid patch there at
> the moment.  And I still don't see why ncurses needs to be in the bucket
> of recipes we track the scm for rather than relying on the latest stable
> release.
>

5.9 was released few days back so that patch might be lean for now
but I assume overtime it will get fatter

> --
> Tom Rini
> Mentor Graphics Corporation
>