Re: Patches being worked on

[Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1976 bytes --]

Hello,

> On 28 Mar 2021, at 14:52, Adolf Belka <adolf.belka(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I have dropped bash from my updates.
> 
> I was able to confirm, by review of the patches and tarball files that
> 
> bash-4.0-paths-1.patch
> bash-4.0-profile-1.patch
> bash-3.2-ssh_source_bash.patch
> 
> are all still needed.

Yes.

> However the bash-5.0 set of 18 patches I could not find all of the patch parts in the tarball files. Doing the build caused several hunks to fail because a match could not be found. Some matched because the changes were now incorporated.

These will all be upstreamed. Instead of releasing a tarball for a minor release, GNU bash only releases the patches. So instead of 5.0.1 you would have one patch to download and another one for 5.0.2, and so on. We appear to be on 5.0.18 then.

> Reviewing the first patch there were several of the lines from the previous version that are no longer in the newer tarball files.

You can just drop them and download the latest set for the 5.1 branch:

  https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-5.1-patches/

> However I am unable to tell if this is because the changes are now incorporated in the tarball files but in a different way to the patch or if they are missing and a new set of patches is required to implement the same changes.

Ideally “patch” should tell you that the patch has already been applied. If it had to be modified during the backport, it might not be able to detect this.

> This update needs someone else to work on it with better skills than mine.

Just drop the patches and keep the other ones :)

-Michael

> Regards,
> 
> Adolf.
> 
> On 28/03/2021 10:33, Adolf Belka wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> 
>> For info I am working on the following update patches:-
>> 
>> bash
>> binutils
>> bison
>> bzip2
>> diffutils
>> ed
>> gawk
>> lm_sensors
>> perl
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Adolf
>> 
> -- 
> Sent from my laptop
>