[oe] [meta-qt5] GStreamer-1.0 path breaking 0.1 support‏

[Gerhard de Clercq]

I guess I'm the only one still stuck on 0.1 but I'll try to send in a patch for whoever also comes to need this. I would appreciate some advice with regards to how I should submit a patch because this is in fact a patch on a patch file which is something quite strange if you ask me. 

I tried to modify the actual patch file manually but that did not go to well. I ended up just applying the current patch to a clean repo clone, copying my modified files to it and then just saving "git diff" to a file to create a newer version of that patch. This does not generate a nice header block like the old patch file had but it does seem to work. Is the header important and if so, how should I generate it?

One I have this new patch, should I simply replace contents of the old file with the new one's and run "git send-email". That would seem normal but with this being a patch on a patch file it will look like a complete mess considering the new one is not even really derived from the old one.

> Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 00:01:53 +0100
> From: martin.jansa at gmail.com
> To: openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [oe]	[meta-qt5] GStreamer-1.0 path breaking 0.1 support‏
> 
> FWIW: there is also:
> http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/88555/
> 
> also still waiting for v3 and I don't know if it was tested with 0.10
> gstreamer.
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > > Otherwise, why is the patch that seems to have been accepted in 2014 to
> > fix the 1.0 breaking 0.1 support not been implemented in the layer yet?
> >
> > It's incorrectly marked as Accepted in patchwork, but it was never merged
> > into the repository, because the author never sent v2 with review comments
> > from me resolved.
> >
> > There was another patch:
> > http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/85075/
> > which was merged and nobody was reporting broken 0.10 support since then.
> > I'm not using 0.10 version, so I was assuming it works now for people who
> > do.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Gerhard de Clercq <
> > gerharddeclercq at outlook.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I've just wasted a lot of time trying to get qtmultimedia to compile on a
> >> Fido build using the Fido branch of meta-qt5. After a lot of tinkering I
> >> finally got it working and have found that the problem was caused by the
> >> 0001-Initial-porting-effort-to-GStreamer-1.0.patch file that ships with the
> >> layer. I initially didn't realize that the troublesome code was coming from
> >> it and debugged the cached source (which it seems is patched) until it
> >> worked. I didn't think it would be so easy but a patch
> >> http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/79531/ I found from 2014
> >> completely told me how to correct the source.
> >>
> >> What bothers me is how can this can be possible. Are the recipes designed
> >> not to apply the patch to non 1.0 build and if so, what could prevent that
> >> from working? Otherwise, why is the patch that seems to have been accepted
> >> in 2014 to fix the 1.0 breaking 0.1 support not been implemented in the
> >> layer yet?
> >>
> >> PS. I see the patch file has changed a bit after Fido but unfortunately
> >> Fido is the latest that my board supports at the moment and I have not been
> >> able to test with a newer version.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Gerhard de Clercq
> >> --
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> >> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> >> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> >>
> >
> >
> -- 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel at lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel