Patchwork libtool version update 2.4.2

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Alexander Khryukin
Date Nov. 9, 2012, 12:38 p.m.
Message ID <1352464732-22984-1-git-send-email-alexander@mezon.ru>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/198129/
State Accepted
Commit 64e04fb27a9a0a4fcc519bcc7344a67009490a91
Headers show

Comments

Alexander Khryukin - Nov. 9, 2012, 12:38 p.m.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Khryukin <alexander@mezon.ru>
---
 package/libtool/libtool.mk | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Thomas Petazzoni - Nov. 10, 2012, 9:53 a.m.
Alexander,

On Fri,  9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:

> -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
> +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2

How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool version
bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used to
autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this patch needs
a good amount of testing before being committed (ideally testing that
all packages having <foo>_AUTORECONF = YES still build).

Thanks,

Thomas
Alexander Khryukin - Nov. 10, 2012, 4:31 p.m.
2012/11/10 Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>

> Alexander,
>
> On Fri,  9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
>
> > -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
> > +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2
>
> How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool version
> bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used to
> autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this patch needs
> a good amount of testing before being committed (ideally testing that
> all packages having <foo>_AUTORECONF = YES still build).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
> Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
> development, consulting, training and support.
> http://free-electrons.com
>

With new libtool i built my system many times
and it works.
Arnout Vandecappelle - Nov. 11, 2012, 10 p.m.
On 11/10/12 10:53, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Alexander,
>
> On Fri,  9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
>
>> -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
>> +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2
>
> How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool version
> bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used to
> autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this patch needs
> a good amount of testing before being committed (ideally testing that
> all packages having<foo>_AUTORECONF = YES still build).

  Can't we rely on the autobuilders to do that?

  That said, I wouldn't do this for 2012.11 anymore...

  Regards,
  Arnout
Thomas Petazzoni - Nov. 11, 2012, 10:05 p.m.
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:00:56 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> On 11/10/12 10:53, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > Alexander,
> >
> > On Fri,  9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> >
> >> -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
> >> +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2
> >
> > How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool
> > version bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used
> > to autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this
> > patch needs a good amount of testing before being committed
> > (ideally testing that all packages having<foo>_AUTORECONF = YES
> > still build).
> 
>   Can't we rely on the autobuilders to do that?

Sure, we'll certainly rely on the autobuilders for a complete testing.
But I wanted to know if it had been tested again 2 packages or 20-40
packages, which makes quite a bit of difference :)

>   That said, I wouldn't do this for 2012.11 anymore...

For sure, it should not be part of 2012.11, we already have enough
issues to fix.

Thomas
Stephan Hoffmann - Nov. 12, 2012, 7:46 a.m.
Am 11.11.2012 23:05, schrieb Thomas Petazzoni:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:00:56 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
>> On 11/10/12 10:53, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>>> Alexander,
>>>
>>> On Fri,  9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
>>>
>>>> -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
>>>> +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2
>>> How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool
>>> version bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used
>>> to autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this
>>> patch needs a good amount of testing before being committed
>>> (ideally testing that all packages having<foo>_AUTORECONF = YES
>>> still build).
>>   Can't we rely on the autobuilders to do that?
> Sure, we'll certainly rely on the autobuilders for a complete testing.
Hello,

did you ever think about inventing a kind of "testing" branch with a
seperate autobuilder running on? That could keep major build problems
away from the master branch.

Just my 2 cents

Stephan
> But I wanted to know if it had been tested again 2 packages or 20-40
> packages, which makes quite a bit of difference :)
>
>>   That said, I wouldn't do this for 2012.11 anymore...
> For sure, it should not be part of 2012.11, we already have enough
> issues to fix.
>
> Thomas
Alexander Khryukin - Nov. 12, 2012, 10:18 a.m.
2012/11/12 Stephan Hoffmann <sho@relinux.de>

> Am 11.11.2012 23:05, schrieb Thomas Petazzoni:
> > On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:00:56 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> >> On 11/10/12 10:53, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> >>> Alexander,
> >>>
> >>> On Fri,  9 Nov 2012 16:38:52 +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> -LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
> >>>> +LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2
> >>> How much testing did you give to this version bump? A libtool
> >>> version bump is a very sensitive operation, as host-libtool is used
> >>> to autoreconfigure many packages in Buildroot. Therefore, this
> >>> patch needs a good amount of testing before being committed
> >>> (ideally testing that all packages having<foo>_AUTORECONF = YES
> >>> still build).
> >>   Can't we rely on the autobuilders to do that?
> > Sure, we'll certainly rely on the autobuilders for a complete testing.
> Hello,
>
> did you ever think about inventing a kind of "testing" branch with a
> seperate autobuilder running on? That could keep major build problems
> away from the master branch.
>
> Just my 2 cents
>
> Stephan
> > But I wanted to know if it had been tested again 2 packages or 20-40
> > packages, which makes quite a bit of difference :)
> >
> >>   That said, I wouldn't do this for 2012.11 anymore...
> > For sure, it should not be part of 2012.11, we already have enough
> > issues to fix.
> >
> > Thomas
>
>
> --
> reLinux     -    Stephan Hoffmann
> Am Schmidtgrund 124    50765 Köln
> Tel. +49.221.95595-19    Fax: -64
> www.reLinux.de     sho@reLinux.de
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot@busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>


I tested new libtool for all packages in Develop section + a lot of others.
Also i can share own .config
Thomas Petazzoni - Nov. 12, 2012, 10:26 a.m.
Stephan,

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:46:26 +0100, Stephan Hoffmann wrote:

> did you ever think about inventing a kind of "testing" branch with a
> seperate autobuilder running on? That could keep major build problems
> away from the master branch.

Yes, this has been discussed during the Developers Meeting, at least
for the "next" branch that gets created once -rc1 is out, to accumulate
patches for the next release.

Thomas
Arnout Vandecappelle - Nov. 12, 2012, 8:57 p.m.
On 11/12/12 11:26, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Stephan,
>
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:46:26 +0100, Stephan Hoffmann wrote:
>
>> did you ever think about inventing a kind of "testing" branch with a
>> seperate autobuilder running on? That could keep major build problems
>> away from the master branch.
>
> Yes, this has been discussed during the Developers Meeting, at least
> for the "next" branch that gets created once -rc1 is out, to accumulate
> patches for the next release.

  Actually it does make sense to have it in general.  We could allow more committers
on that branch, and Peter could cherry-pick from it, which could save him a few
seconds per patch.  And it could make master slightly more stable, because only
patches that don't kill the autobuilders would get cherry-picked.

  Maybe something to discuss in February.

  Regards,
  Arnout

Patch

diff --git a/package/libtool/libtool.mk b/package/libtool/libtool.mk
index 4b9657c..ae7a4b8 100644
--- a/package/libtool/libtool.mk
+++ b/package/libtool/libtool.mk
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ 
 # libtool
 #
 #############################################################
-LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.2.10
+LIBTOOL_VERSION = 2.4.2
 LIBTOOL_SOURCE = libtool-$(LIBTOOL_VERSION).tar.gz
 LIBTOOL_SITE = $(BR2_GNU_MIRROR)/libtool
 LIBTOOL_INSTALL_STAGING = YES