Message ID | CAG2jQ8gLL4NdmHcFA=ELMbFfHY1oGPGaXkvSaPk66sesh-0+6w@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
On 09/03/13 15:59, Markos Chandras wrote: > Hi, > > The following pull request bumps webkit to 1.11.5. A few upstream > patches are necessary to > make it work properly. It also restores the build on MIPS which is > currently (1.9.6 and 1.11.5) > broken due to missing assembly functions. The following patches have been > applied: > > - upstream fix for 32-bit autotools > - upstream fix for conditional gstreamer build of gtklauncher > - upstream fix for detecting the latest harfbuzz > - Update existing patch for disabling docs > - Update existing patch for execinfo_h > - upstream patch for the MIPS DFG support. This fixes > compilation problems on MIPS. > > The patch was tested with MIPS32r2, x86_64 and ARM cortex-a9 configurations. > > The following changes since commit b7c0041c31754a5679eb0a3e4bcf41f80d473ae2: > > kmod: does not support static builds (2013-09-02 23:22:14 +0200) > > are available in the git repository at: > > https://github.com/hwoarang/buildroot.git webkit > > for you to fetch changes up to 26a8323eeed2a3cea5b53917565d4a23d7aa0889: > > webkit: Version bump to 1.11.5 (2013-09-03 13:19:32 +0100) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Markos Chandras (1): > webkit: Version bump to 1.11.5 > > package/webkit/Config.in | 13 +- > package/webkit/webkit-build-fix-for-32-bit-autotools.patch | 34 +++ > package/webkit/webkit-build-fix-for-gtklauncher.patch | 51 ++++ > package/webkit/webkit-detect-harfbuzz-icu.patch | 28 +++ > package/webkit/webkit-disable-docrebase.patch | 13 +- > package/webkit/webkit-execinfo_h.patch | 20 +- > package/webkit/webkit-mips-dfg.patch | 1490 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > package/webkit/webkit.mk | 18 +- Hi Markos, Any chance to manually remove the huge patch so that you can post this on the list? Otherwise, there's not much chance for a review... Is there a reason why you cannot download the upstream patches with WEBKIT_PATCH ? Regards, Arnout > 8 files changed, 1637 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 package/webkit/webkit-build-fix-for-32-bit-autotools.patch > create mode 100644 package/webkit/webkit-build-fix-for-gtklauncher.patch > create mode 100644 package/webkit/webkit-detect-harfbuzz-icu.patch > create mode 100644 package/webkit/webkit-mips-dfg.patch > >
Dear Arnout Vandecappelle, On Wed, 04 Sep 2013 18:49:18 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > > package/webkit/webkit-mips-dfg.patch | 1490 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > package/webkit/webkit.mk | 18 +- > > Hi Markos, > > Any chance to manually remove the huge patch so that you can post this > on the list? Otherwise, there's not much chance for a review... A 1490 line patch is not so huge, I believe it should make it on the list, and if not, Peter will validate it manually. I agree that the overall patch should be sent to the list for review. > Is there a reason why you cannot download the upstream patches with > WEBKIT_PATCH ? When it's possible, it's indeed a good idea. Best regards, Thomas
Hello, On 5 September 2013 09:01, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> wrote: >> Hi Markos, >> >> Any chance to manually remove the huge patch so that you can post this >> on the list? Otherwise, there's not much chance for a review... > > A 1490 line patch is not so huge, I believe it should make it on the > list, and if not, Peter will validate it manually. I agree that the > overall patch should be sent to the list for review. Well, it's an upstream patch, so i don't think there is much to review there but I can send it to the list anyway. > >> Is there a reason why you cannot download the upstream patches with >> WEBKIT_PATCH ? > > When it's possible, it's indeed a good idea. > Unfortunately, I can't (or I don't think I can) use that. I had to tweak the upstream patches a bit, for example delete the changes in the ChangeLog files since they don't apply. For other patches, I had to merge 2-3 upstream patches into a single one in order to fix the problem completely instead of providing separate patches with 1-2 line fixes.
Dear Markos Chandras, On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 09:48:32 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote: > > A 1490 line patch is not so huge, I believe it should make it on the > > list, and if not, Peter will validate it manually. I agree that the > > overall patch should be sent to the list for review. > > Well, it's an upstream patch, so i don't think there is much to review > there but I can send it to the list anyway. It's not much to review this upstream patch, but rather the overall changes in webkit.mk and so on. > >> Is there a reason why you cannot download the upstream patches with > >> WEBKIT_PATCH ? > > > > When it's possible, it's indeed a good idea. > > Unfortunately, I can't (or I don't think I can) use that. I had to > tweak the upstream patches a bit, > for example delete the changes in the ChangeLog files since they don't apply. > For other patches, I had to merge 2-3 upstream patches into a single > one in order to fix the problem completely instead of providing > separate patches with 1-2 line fixes. Ok. Since the patches are upstream, that's fine, since it means they will be removed at some point in the future. Thanks, Thomas
Hi Thomas, On 5 September 2013 10:01, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> wrote: > Dear Markos Chandras, > > On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 09:48:32 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote: > >> > A 1490 line patch is not so huge, I believe it should make it on the >> > list, and if not, Peter will validate it manually. I agree that the >> > overall patch should be sent to the list for review. >> >> Well, it's an upstream patch, so i don't think there is much to review >> there but I can send it to the list anyway. > > It's not much to review this upstream patch, but rather the overall > changes in webkit.mk and so on. Oh sorry I thought you were referring just to the MIPS patch. > >> >> Is there a reason why you cannot download the upstream patches with >> >> WEBKIT_PATCH ? >> > >> > When it's possible, it's indeed a good idea. >> >> Unfortunately, I can't (or I don't think I can) use that. I had to >> tweak the upstream patches a bit, >> for example delete the changes in the ChangeLog files since they don't apply. >> For other patches, I had to merge 2-3 upstream patches into a single >> one in order to fix the problem completely instead of providing >> separate patches with 1-2 line fixes. > > Ok. Since the patches are upstream, that's fine, since it means they > will be removed at some point in the future. > > Thanks, > Yes that's true. I will send the patch to the list.