[oe] Yocto security responses.

[Martin Jansa]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Joe MacDonald <Joe_MacDonald at mentor.com>
wrote:

> Not to be brusque about it, but I've said all I intend to say on that
> patch and I've regularly marked it rejected in patchwork, but it keeps
> getting pulled back into the 'master-next' state, I assume by a script
> of some sort, so dnsmasq continues to be something that warrants special
> attention, because I know I manually have to tell my own automated
> processes to ignore it.  :-/
>

Thanks for merge to master, the meta-networking patches are usually in
master-next until they are merged.

I just do the rebase regularly and if they are still there after rebase I
sometimes don't dig in ML or patchwork status to find out if they are still
in review (and should stay in master-next) or already definitely refused
and I should drop them while rebasing.

Currently there are 4 pending meta-networking changes:
pick 6302b49 dnsmasq: disable the service by default
pick 45559fa openconnect: fix parallel compilation failure
pick aac7e9d squid: upgrade to 3.5.27
pick ff5e841 libmnl: Move to oe-core
(and my WIP spice changes which I haven't sent to ML yet).

I'll drop the first now as discussed in this thread (even when
https://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/137644/ is still marked in
patchwork as "Master Next" not "Rejected").

I'll drop the 2nd as well based on the discussion in https://patchwork.
openembedded.org/patch/143205/

The 3rd one is for some reason marked as Changes Requested, but doesn't
include any ML discussion in https://patchwork.
openembedded.org/patch/143406/

and the last one should imho be merged, because in last batch you've merged:
b8210dd iproute2: Move tipc enablement to oe-core
which already depends on libmnl in oe-core.