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

[Khem Raj]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 11:32 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Tom Rini <tom_rini at mentor.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/06/2011 11:27 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> It's invalid at the moment, yes.  But you haven't explained why ncurses
>>> needs to be in the bleeding edge bucket.  Usually this is for stuff that
>>> hasn't really reached a stability point.
>>>
>> It does not have to be but those patches are cumulative fixed that are done
>> on top of a release. I am sure we will also run into the problems those will
>> fix thats why its better to keep and eye on them
>
> That can be said for just about every recipe we have.  It sounds like
> you're suggesting we need _svn recipe or similar recipe for ncurses as
> well.  I still don't see why ncurses is special in this regard and ask
> that when you see a worthwhile patch for ncurses 5.9 that you do another
> pull request.  I'm just trying to keep oe-core in sync with
> openembedded.master.
>

Those patches are not same as all patches that would be applied to say
svn version these are fixes on top of a release e.g. 5.9 I was merely
suggesting that your upgrade patch is fine please see if there already
are some fixes on top of 5.9 that we need
thats all


> --
> Tom Rini
> Mentor Graphics Corporation
>