[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53FCABD1.8030105@barfooze.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:46:25 +0200
From: John Spencer <maillist-musl@...fooze.de>
To: paul@...lbarker.me.uk
CC: sabotage@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Upstream status of patches from Sabotage Linux
Paul Barker wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We've recently added support for musl libc to the OpenEmbedded build system.
> I've taken two patches from Sabotage Linux that fix build problems encountered
> with musl, these are:
>
> KEEP/mc-CTRL.patch
> KEEP/ethtool-uint.patch
>
> In OpenEmbedded we like to keep track of the upstream status of patches and we
> like to minimise the number of patches we carry by pushing fixes back upstream
> wherever possible.
that's very reasonable.
>
> Do you know whether any attempt has been made to push these fixes into the
> upstream mc or ethtool sources?
No, they've not yet been sent, just like the majority of patches in
sabotage.
The reason for not doing so is mainly lazyness on my part (not willing
to subscribe to yet another maillist, fight with yet another maintainer,
etc; for example i've pinged my sed-fix for lvm2 at least 4 times over
half a year and it's still not merged).
OTOH sabotage was the first distribution based on musl so the amount of
patches was just overwhelming. hopefully at this point many of the
issues have already been fixed upstream.
> If not, would you mind if I send these patches
> upstream and see what the response is?
This would be very much appreciated ! Thanks!
-- JS
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
