github and patches updates in the manual (branch yem/manual)
cover github and patches updates in the manual (branch yem/manual)
Hello All!
This series, intended to go in before -rc1:
- clarifies the manual about what hashes are meaningful
- clarifies the manual about when to add hashes for GitHub-hosted tarballs
- removes hashes from two packages downloaded from GitHub
- updates the patch naming convention
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
The following changes since commit a0b5052e9dec110903e1887e17bca314df228bb4:
sunxi-boards: bump version (2014-11-01 23:28:06 +0100)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.busybox.net/~ymorin/git/buildroot yem/manual
for you to fetch changes up to 0b36850cf518809b83d4e21b81b0bc974c847199:
docs/manual: document the new patch naming convention (2014-11-02 15:35:47 +0100)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maxime Hadjinlian (3):
manual: Add notes about GitHub and hashes
opencv: Remove hash file
libevent: Remove hash file
Yann E. MORIN (2):
docs/manual: also document md5 hash docs/manual: document the new patch naming convention
docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++---------- docs/manual/patch-policy.txt | 21 ++++++++++------ package/libevent/libevent.hash | 2 -- package/opencv/opencv.hash | 3 --- 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 package/libevent/libevent.hash delete mode 100644 package/opencv/opencv.hash
Signature · 6 lines
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
PATCH 1/5 docs/manual: also document md5 hash
We accept an md5 hash, but only if comming from upstream, and id also accompanied with a stronger hash.
Thanks to Maxime for the interactive review! ;-)
--- docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt +21 -12
@@ -376,8 +376,9 @@ The format of this file is one line for each file for which to check the hash, each line being space-separated, with these three fields: * the type of hash, one of: -** +sha1+, +sha224+, +sha256+, +sha384+, +sha512+ +** +md5+, +sha1+, +sha224+, +sha256+, +sha384+, +sha512+ * the hash of the file: +** for +md5+, 32 hexadecimal characters ** for +sha1+, 40 hexadecimal characters ** for +sha224+, 56 hexadecimal characters ** for +sha256+, 64 hexadecimal characters
@@ -391,28 +392,36 @@ lines are ignored. There can be more than one hash for a single file, each on its own line. In this case, all hashes must match. -Ideally, the hashes stored in this file should match the hashes published by -upstream, e.g. on their website, in the e-mail announcement... If upstream -provides more than one type of hash (say, +sha1+ and +sha512+), then it is -best to add all those hashes in the +.hash+ file. If upstream does not -provide any hash, then compute at least one yourself, and mention this in a -comment line above the hashes. +*Note:* Ideally, the hashes stored in this file should match the hashes +published by upstream, e.g. on their website, in the e-mail announcement... +If upstream provides more than one type of hash (e.g. +sha1+ and +sha512+), +then it is best to add all those hashes in the +.hash+ file. If upstream +does not provide any hash, or only provides an +md5+ hash, then compute at +least one strong hash yourself (like +sha1+ or +sha256+, but not +md5+), +and mention this in a comment line above the hashes. *Note:* the number of spaces does not matter, so one can use spaces to properly align the different fields. -The example below defines a +sha1+ and a +sha256+ published by upstream for -the main +libfoo-1.2.3.tar.bz2+ tarball, plus two locally-computed hashes, -a +sha256+ for a downloaded patch, and a +sha1+ for a downloaded binary blob: +The example below defines: + +* a +sha1+ and a +sha256+ published by upstream for the main + +libfoo-1.2.3.tar.bz2+ tarball, +* an +md5+ from upstream and a locally-computed +sha256+ for a downloaded + binary blob, +* a +sha256+ from upstream for a downloaded patch. ---- # Hashes from: http://www.foosoftware.org/download/libfoo-1.2.3.tar.bz2.{sha1,sha256}: sha1 486fb55c3efa71148fe07895fd713ea3a5ae343a libfoo-1.2.3.tar.bz2 sha256 efc8103cc3bcb06bda6a781532d12701eb081ad83e8f90004b39ab81b65d4369 libfoo-1.2.3.tar.bz2 -# No upstream hashes for the following: +# md5 from: http://www.foosoftware.org/download/libfoo-1.2.3.tar.bz2.md5, sha256 locally computed: +md5 2d608f3c318c6b7557d551a5a09314f03452f1a1 libfoo-data.bin +sha256 01ba4719c80b6fe911b091a7c05124b64eeece964e09c058ef8f9805daca546b libfoo-data.bin + +# Upstream has no hash, so locally computed: sha256 ff52101fb90bbfc3fe9475e425688c660f46216d7e751c4bbdb1dc85cdccacb9 libfoo-fix-blabla.patch -sha1 2d608f3c318c6b7557d551a5a09314f03452f1a1 libfoo-data.bin ---- If the +.hash+ file is present, and it contains one or more hashes for a
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
PATCH 2/5 manual: Add notes about GitHub and hashes
In reply to Yann E. MORINFrom: Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
We can't take hashes from GitHub, unless the tarball has been uploaded by the maintainer, otherwise it is generated and may change over time, which renders hash files, useless.
---
v2-> v3 (YEM):
- move the block down, to be with with the other "note"
- add reference to the GitHub helper
- small gramatical fix s/automated/automatically/
v1 -> v2:
- Add changes as requested by Yann E. Morin
- Reword the comment on released tarball
--- docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
docs/manual/adding-packages-directory.txt +7 -0
@@ -400,6 +400,13 @@ does not provide any hash, or only provides an +md5+ hash, then compute at least one strong hash yourself (like +sha1+ or +sha256+, but not +md5+), and mention this in a comment line above the hashes. +*Note:* If +libfoo+ is from GitHub (see xref:github-download-url[] for +details), we can only accept +.hash+ file if the package is a released +(e.g. uploaded by the maintainer) tarball. Otherwise, the automatically +generated tarball may change over time, and thus its hashes may be +different each time it is downloaded, making the +.hash+ file irrelevant +for that tarball. + *Note:* the number of spaces does not matter, so one can use spaces to properly align the different fields.
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
PATCH 3/5 opencv: Remove hash file
In reply to Yann E. MORINFrom: Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Since the tarball we download is generated from GitHub, there's no saying that the tarball won't differ in a month from now. So the hash has no value there.
---
YEM:
- remove comment about changes to the manual, done in a previous
patch;
- after some testing, it seems tarballs are cached for only about 15
minutes, which is largely enough to easily trigger a false hash
mismatch.
---
package/opencv/opencv.hash | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 package/opencv/opencv.hashpackage/opencv/opencv.hash deleted +0 -3
@@ -1,3 +0,0 @@ -# From https://github.com/itseez/opencv/archive/2.4.10/ -md5 3346a59310d788d3845f4fd6043a108a opencv-2.4.10.tar.gz -sha1 a0c2d5944364fc4f26b6160b33c03082b1fa08c1 opencv-2.4.10.tar.gz
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
Thomas Petazzoni
AppliedPATCH 3/5 opencv: Remove hash file
Dear Yann E. MORIN,
Quoted 9 lines · Yann E. MORIN
From: Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Since the tarball we download is generated from GitHub, there's no saying that the tarball won't differ in a month from now. So the hash has no value there.
Signed-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>Reviewed-by "Yann E. MORIN" <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Yann E. MORIN <[email protected]>
Applied, thanks!
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH 4/5 libevent: Remove hash file
In reply to Yann E. MORINFrom: Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Since the tarball we download is generated from GitHub, there's no saying that the tarball won't differ in a month from now. So the hash has no value there.
---
YEM:
- remove comment about changes to the manual, done in a previous
patch;
- after some testing, it seems tarballs are cached for only about 15
minutes, which is largely enough to easily trigger a false hash
mismatch.
---
package/libevent/libevent.hash | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 package/libevent/libevent.hashpackage/libevent/libevent.hash deleted +0 -2
@@ -1,2 +0,0 @@ -# Locally calculated after checking pgp signature -sha256 22a530a8a5ba1cb9c080cba033206b17dacd21437762155c6d30ee6469f574f5 libevent-2.0.21-stable.tar.gz
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
PATCH 4/5 libevent: Remove hash file
Dear Yann E. MORIN,
Quoted 9 lines · Yann E. MORIN
From: Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Since the tarball we download is generated from GitHub, there's no saying that the tarball won't differ in a month from now. So the hash has no value there.
Signed-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>Reviewed-by "Yann E. MORIN" <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Yann E. MORIN <[email protected]>
This patch was marked as Rejected because we've switched back to using a tarball from sourceforge for libevent instead of github.
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH 5/5 docs/manual: document the new patch naming convention
In reply to Yann E. MORINTo ease generating patches, we now use a naming convention that is in line with what git-format-patch does, that is:
- do not prefix patches with the package name
- prefix patches with a 4-digit mber
- start numbering at 0001
---
Changes v1 -> v2:
- reword slightly (Thomas DS)
--- docs/manual/patch-policy.txt | 21 ++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
docs/manual/patch-policy.txt +14 -7
@@ -31,16 +31,23 @@ Most patches are provided within Buildroot, in the package directory; these typically aim to fix cross-compilation, libc support, or other such issues. -These patch files should be named +<packagename>-<number>-<description>.patch+. - -A +series+ file, as used by +quilt+, may also be added in the -package directory. In that case, the +series+ file defines the patch -application order. +These patch files should be named +<number>-<description>.patch+. .Notes - The patch files coming with Buildroot should not contain any package version -reference in their filename. -- The field +<number>+ in the patch file name refers to the 'apply order'. + reference in their filename. +- The field +<number>+ in the patch file name refers to the 'apply order', + and shall start at 1; It is preferred to pad the number with zeros up to 4 + digits, like 'git-format-patch' does. E.g.: +0001-foobar-the-buz.patch+ +- Previously, it was mandatory for patches to be prefixed with the name of + the package, like +<package>-<number>-<description>.patch+, but that is + no longer the case. Existing packages will be fixed as time passes. 'Do + not prefix patches with the package name.' +- Previously, a +series+ file, as used by +quilt+, could also be added in + the package directory. In that case, the +series+ file defines the patch + application order. This is deprecated, and will be removed in the future. + 'Do not use a series file.' + ==== Global patch directory
Signature · 1 line
1.9.1
PATCH 1/1 lttng-tools: Update hash file after silent update
In reply to Yann E. MORINThe tarballs for 2.5.1 have been silently updated by upstream at '2014-10-31 15:35'.
This fixes:
http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a2a/a2ab3c526a3f67371524e1b076512cf1f8058c72/build-end.log
Signed-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Cc: Romain Naour <[email protected]>
---
Thanks to Romain Naour for pointing this out on IRC.
--- package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash +1 -1
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ # Locally generated -sha256 3c6511e6ceef975cfe36b5644ab9bfaa6780c71b1d2551718279823924429739 lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2 +sha256 1084ce1fac0030cb5e0e3e117002444ceb9f94d6a15a6cce6607c480eca9b21b lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2
Signature · 1 line
2.1.1
PATCH 1/1 lttng-tools: Update hash file after silent update
Hi Maxime,
Le 02/11/2014 17:24, Maxime Hadjinlian a ?crit :
Quoted 20 lines
The tarballs for 2.5.1 have been silently updated by upstream at '2014-10-31 15:35'.
This fixes:
http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a2a/a2ab3c526a3f67371524e1b076512cf1f8058c72/build-end.logSigned-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Cc: Romain Naour <[email protected]>
---
Thanks to Romain Naour for pointing this out on IRC.--- package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash +0
-0
package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash line 2
Quoted 3 lines
package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash +1
-1@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ # Locally generated -sha256 3c6511e6ceef975cfe36b5644ab9bfaa6780c71b1d2551718279823924429739 lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2 +sha256 1084ce1fac0030cb5e0e3e117002444ceb9f94d6a15a6cce6607c480eca9b21b lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2
Manually downloaded tarball, and manually checked the hash.
Best regards,
Romain Naour
PATCH 1/1 lttng-tools: Update hash file after silent update
In reply to Maxime HadjinlianMaxime, All,
On 2014-11-02 17:24 +0100, Maxime Hadjinlian spake thusly:
Quoted 2 lines
The tarballs for 2.5.1 have been silently updated by upstream at '2014-10-31 15:35'.
Grr... :-(
However, the other LTTng archives still have the same hashes... :-(
Quoted 5 lines
This fixes:
http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a2a/a2ab3c526a3f67371524e1b076512cf1f8058c72/build-end.logSigned-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Cc: Romain Naour <[email protected]>
Manualy downloaded, and manually checked the hash.
However, I NAK this change, because the archive has changed a *lot*:
http://code.bulix.org/z2c8r0-87331?raw
Also, notice this file:
lttng-tools-2.5.1/tests/regression/tools/save-load/ /tmp/tmp.eAJ1f0oCZE/test-42/save-42.lttng
Yes, that's a single filename with a space in it (but the new archives removes it, although it still is in the repository).
So, Maxime and Romain, please talk to upstream about this issue.
In the meantime, I prefer we do *not* update the hash until we have a sensible answer from the LTTng folks, or at least until later in the release cycle.
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
Quoted 21 lines
---
Thanks to Romain Naour for pointing this out on IRC.--- package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash +1
-1@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ # Locally generated -sha256 3c6511e6ceef975cfe36b5644ab9bfaa6780c71b1d2551718279823924429739 lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2 +sha256 1084ce1fac0030cb5e0e3e117002444ceb9f94d6a15a6cce6607c480eca9b21b lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2Signature · 6 lines
2.1.1 _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot at busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
Signature · 6 lines
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
PATCH 1/1 lttng-tools: Update hash file after silent update
Hi Yann, Romain, all
Quoted 24 lines · Yann E. MORIN
Maxime, All,
On 2014-11-02 17:24 +0100, Maxime Hadjinlian spake thusly:
Quoted 2 lines
The tarballs for 2.5.1 have been silently updated by upstream at '2014-10-31 15:35'.
Grr... :-(
However, the other LTTng archives still have the same hashes... :-(
Quoted 5 lines
This fixes:
http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a2a/a2ab3c526a3f67371524e1b076512cf1f8058c72/build-end.logSigned-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Cc: Romain Naour <[email protected]>Manualy downloaded, and manually checked the hash.
However, I NAK this change, because the archive has changed a *lot*:
http://code.bulix.org/z2c8r0-87331?rawAlso, notice this file:
lttng-tools-2.5.1/tests/regression/tools/save-load/ /tmp/tmp.eAJ1f0oCZE/test-42/save-42.lttng
Quoted 8 lines
Yes, that's a single filename with a space in it (but the new archives removes it, although it still is in the repository).
So, Maxime and Romain, please talk to upstream about this issue.
In the meantime, I prefer we do *not* update the hash until we have a sensible answer from the LTTng folks, or at least until later in the release cycle.
Indeed do not apply this patch, it seems the lttng folks have messed up their releases, I'll report a bug.
Thanks Yann for finding this.
Quoted 33 lines
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.Quoted 17 lines
---
Thanks to Romain Naour for pointing this out on IRC.--- package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)package/lttng-tools/lttng-tools.hash +1
-2@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ # Locally generated -sha256 3c6511e6ceef975cfe36b5644ab9bfaa6780c71b1d2551718279823924429739 lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2 +sha256 1084ce1fac0030cb5e0e3e117002444ceb9f94d6a15a6cce6607c480eca9b21b lttng-tools-2.5.1.tar.bz2 --2.1.1
Quoted 4 lines
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot--
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.| Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
PATCH 1/1 lttng-tools: Update hash file after silent update
In reply to Maxime HadjinlianQuoted 10 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
"Maxime" == Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]> writes:
The tarballs for 2.5.1 have been silently updated by upstream at '2014-10-31 15:35'.
This fixes:
http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a2a/a2ab3c526a3f67371524e1b076512cf1f8058c72/build-end.logSigned-off-by Maxime Hadjinlian <[email protected]>
Cc: Romain Naour <[email protected]>
Sorry, for some reason I missed this patch and did the modification myself.
Signature · 1 line
Bye, Peter Korsgaard