[oe] [PATCH] tar: upgrade to version 1.25

[Martin Jansa]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 4:28 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Philip Balister <philip at balister.org> wrote:
>> On 11/17/2010 06:48 PM, Scott Garman wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/17/2010 06:18 PM, Philip Balister wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 11/17/2010 06:13 PM, Scott Garman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Scott Garman<sgarman at zenlinux.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> recipes/tar/tar_1.23.bb | 6 ------
>>>>> recipes/tar/tar_1.25.bb | 6 ++++++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>> delete mode 100644 recipes/tar/tar_1.23.bb
>>>>> create mode 100644 recipes/tar/tar_1.25.bb
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/recipes/tar/tar_1.23.bb b/recipes/tar/tar_1.23.bb
>>>>> deleted file mode 100644
>>>>> index dc37247..0000000
>>>>> --- a/recipes/tar/tar_1.23.bb
>>>>> +++ /dev/null
>>>>> @@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
>>>>> -require tar.inc
>>>>> -
>>>>> -PR = "${INC_PR}"
>>>>> -
>>>>> -SRC_URI[md5sum] = "41e2ca4b924ec7860e51b43ad06cdb7e"
>>>>> -SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
>>>>> "c9328372db62fbb1d94c9e4e3cefc961111af46de47085b635359c00a0eebe36"
>>>>> diff --git a/recipes/tar/tar_1.25.bb b/recipes/tar/tar_1.25.bb
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..c611f77
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/recipes/tar/tar_1.25.bb
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>>>>> +require tar.inc
>>>>> +
>>>>> +PR = "${INC_PR}"
>>>>> +
>>>>> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "6e497f861c77bbba2f7da4e10270995b"
>>>>> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
>>>>> "f3f6ce41b8e0f327abd05c95990f113ddafbae131e10f79a99728ed46458494b"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Philip Balister <philip at balister.org>
>>>>
>>>> Can you add tar-1.23 to the removal.txt file? Ask it be removed in a
>>>> couple of months. This way we have a schedule to delete the older recipe.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the quick ack, Philip. Question though on the removal.txt
>>> addition - this patch deletes the v1.23 version already. Does it need to
>>> be kept around instead? I would think not given that this is a pretty
>>> trivial update.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you meant tar v1.18 and/or v1.20, which are still there?
>>
>> Oops, I wasn't paying that close attention. I'd still leave 1.23 around for
>> a couple of months, just in case there is some weird issue with 1.25. We
>> should check on the older ones and add them to removal.txt also. I'd like to
>> see us get into a sane clean up old stuff cycle, instead of the delete
>> everything at once approach. Of course checking to see if any in tree
>> distros use them is  good thing.
>>
>
> Yeah probably a sane thing. Make 1.25 default and let 1.23 linger
> around for a while
> just in case.

Gentoo already has serious bug reported against 1.25
http://bugs.gentoo.org/342983
resulting in added 1.25 being masked now there

Maybe we should keep 1.23 default until it's resolved or confirmed
that OE is not affected by this.

Regards,