[OE-core] [PATCH] atk: add patch to replace G_CONST_RETURN with const

[Martin Jansa]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:33:18AM -0700, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 09/30/2011 01:47 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > * otherwise build fails when glib is 2.30.0 or newer (and G_DISABLE_DEPRECATED is enabled - like in atk)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa<Martin.Jansa at gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   .../atk/atk-1.32.0/remove.G_CONST_RETURN.patch     |  628 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >   meta/recipes-support/atk/atk_1.32.0.bb             |    5 +-
> >   2 files changed, 632 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >   create mode 100644 meta/recipes-support/atk/atk-1.32.0/remove.G_CONST_RETURN.patch
> >
> > diff --git a/meta/recipes-support/atk/atk-1.32.0/remove.G_CONST_RETURN.patch b/meta/recipes-support/atk/atk-1.32.0/remove.G_CONST_RETURN.patch
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..0cdf041
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/meta/recipes-support/atk/atk-1.32.0/remove.G_CONST_RETURN.patch
> > @@ -0,0 +1,628 @@
> > +Upstream-Status: Accepted
> > +
> > +Similar patch is already included in 2.0.1 and newer
> > +http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/sources/atk/2.0/atk-2.0.1.news
> > +
> 
> No Signed-off-by: in the patch header.
> 
> If the newer version of atk is available, why not update atk in oe-core 
> to that version and not add this patch?
> 
> Is there a reason we can't update to 2.0.1 at this time?

I'm not atk expert so to minimize influence of such build fix I didn't
want to upgrade to new major version. But if the 2.0 API is compatible
feel free to update to 2.0.1.

Btw: I've included this patch to "Glib related change" pull request
later when I had more changes to send them as separate patches..

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20110930/a01d6a76/attachment-0002.sig>