U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
From: Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCH allows user to give URL of patches on the Web, but in that case BR dl infra tries to compare hashes of the downloaded patches with the infos from boot/uboot/uboot.hash.
So, for that case (user specified patches), tell BR not to check hashes.
--- boot/uboot/uboot.mk | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
boot/uboot/uboot.mk +2 -0
@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS += UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILE # directories or files. UBOOT_PATCHES = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCH)) UBOOT_PATCH = $(filter ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME = $(notdir $(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME) define UBOOT_APPLY_LOCAL_PATCHES for p in $(filter-out ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) ; do \
Signature · 1 line
2.1.4
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Quoted 17 lines · julien.boibessot at free.fr
From: Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCHallows user to give URL of patches on the Web, but in that case BR dl infra tries to compare hashes of the downloaded patches with the infos from boot/uboot/uboot.hash.
So, for that case (user specified patches), tell BR not to check hashes.Signed-off-by Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>--- boot/uboot/uboot.mk | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)boot/uboot/uboot.mk +0
-0
boot/uboot/uboot.mk UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS += UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILE · line 112
Quoted 4 lines
boot/uboot/uboot.mk +1
-0@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS += UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILE # directories or files. UBOOT_PATCHES = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCH)) UBOOT_PATCH = $(filter ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME = $(notdir $(UBOOT_PATCHES))
Since only the non-local patches will be downloaded, perhaps it's better to
use UBOOT_PATCH instead of UBOOT_PATCHES.
Also, there is no need to use an additional variable for this, it's used only
once.
Regards,
Arnout
Quoted 5 lines
boot/uboot/uboot.mk +1
-0+BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME) define UBOOT_APPLY_LOCAL_PATCHES for p in $(filter-out ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) ; do \
Signature · 6 lines
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Quoted 26 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 17 lines · julien.boibessot at free.fr
From: Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCHallows user to give URL of patches on the Web, but in that case BR dl infra tries to compare hashes of the downloaded patches with the infos from boot/uboot/uboot.hash.
So, for that case (user specified patches), tell BR not to check hashes.Signed-off-by Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>--- boot/uboot/uboot.mk | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)boot/uboot/uboot.mk +0
-0boot/uboot/uboot.mk UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS += UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILE · line 112
Quoted 4 lines
boot/uboot/uboot.mk +1
-0@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS += UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILE # directories or files. UBOOT_PATCHES = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCH)) UBOOT_PATCH = $(filter ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME = $(notdir $(UBOOT_PATCHES))Since only the non-local patches will be downloaded, perhaps it's better to
useUBOOT_PATCHinstead ofUBOOT_PATCHES.
Quoted 2 lines
Also, there is no need to use an additional variable for this, it's used only
once.
Oh, and something similar should be done for LINUX_PATCH as well.
Regards,
Arnout
Signature · 6 lines
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Hello,
Arnout,
thanks for the comments.
Quoted 32 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 31 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 21 lines · julien.boibessot at free.fr
From: Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCHallows user to give URL of patches on the Web, but in
that case BR dl infra tries to compare hashes of the downloaded patches with the
infos from boot/uboot/uboot.hash.
So, for that case (user specified patches), tell BR not to check hashes.Signed-off-by Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>--- boot/uboot/uboot.mk | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)boot/uboot/uboot.mk +0
-0@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS +=
UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILEQuoted 4 lines
# directories or files. UBOOT_PATCHES = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCH)) UBOOT_PATCH = $(filter ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME = $(notdir $(UBOOT_PATCHES))Since only the non-local patches will be downloaded, perhaps it's
better to
useUBOOT_PATCHinstead ofUBOOT_PATCHES.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Also, there is no need to use an additional variable for this, it's
used only
once.Oh, and something similar should be done for
LINUX_PATCHas well.
LINUX_PATCH is already working well with external patches that have to be downloaded.
Regards,
Julien
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Quoted 7 lines · Julien Boibessot
Hello,
Arnout,
thanks for the comments.
On 14/04/2016 23:25, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
[snip]
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Oh, and something similar should be done for
LINUX_PATCHas well.
LINUX_PATCHis already working well with external patches that have to be downloaded.
Of course, because we don't have a linux.hash and probably never will have one.
Regards,
Arnout
Signature · 6 lines
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Quoted 10 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 7 lines · Julien Boibessot
Hello,
Arnout,
thanks for the comments.
On 14/04/2016 23:25, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
[snip]
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Oh, and something similar should be done for
LINUX_PATCHas well.
LINUX_PATCHis already working well with external patches that have to be downloaded.Of course, because we don't have a linux.hash and probably never will
have one.
ah ok, got it now ! :-)
So why can't we just get rid of uboot.hash too ?
Regards,
Julien
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Quoted 13 lines · Julien Boibessot
Quoted 12 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 7 lines · Julien Boibessot
Hello,
Arnout,
thanks for the comments.
On 14/04/2016 23:25, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
[snip]
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Oh, and something similar should be done for
LINUX_PATCHas well.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
LINUX_PATCHis already working well with external patches that have to be downloaded.Of course, because we don't have a linux.hash and probably never will
have one.ah ok, got it now ! :-)
So why can't we just get rid of uboot.hash too ?
I don't think so.
For the kernel, it is very unlikely that you just use the latest version, most
projects will want a specific version and usually even a patched version. With device trees this becomes somewhat less true, but even so, most people just don't use the latest-and-greatest kernel. Therefore, having hashes is quite useless.
For u-boot (and barebox for that matter), this also used to be the case, but
nowadays you can very often get away with just using the upstream version. In this case, the hash is indeed valuable.
Cc-ing Yann, our hash expert :-)
Regards,
Arnout
Signature · 6 lines
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
Arnout, Julien, All,
On 2016-04-20 22:18 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly:
Quoted 17 lines · Julien Boibessot
Quoted 16 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 15 lines · Julien Boibessot
Quoted 7 lines
Hello,
Arnout,
thanks for the comments.
On 14/04/2016 23:25, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
[snip]
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Oh, and something similar should be done for
LINUX_PATCHas well.
LINUX_PATCHis already working well with external patches that have to be downloaded.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Of course, because we don't have a linux.hash and probably never will
have one.ah ok, got it now ! :-)
So why can't we just get rid of uboot.hash too ?I don't think so.
Siding with Arnout on that one: we want to one day make .hash files mandatory.
Quoted 5 lines
For the kernel, it is very unlikely that you just use the latest version,
most projects will want a specific version and usually even a patched version. With device trees this becomes somewhat less true, but even so, most people just don't use the latest-and-greatest kernel. Therefore, having hashes is quite useless.
Yes and no. We could well have hashes for the latest release, at least. Then, when bumping, we can leave the old one and just add the new one; thus hashes would be piling up as time goes, at least for official releases.
Plus, we could also bulk-add hashes for older official releases. Official releases are also very often used, at least for "standard" architectures like x86, so it would not be nonsense to have hashes for those releases.
Normally, when a .hash file does exist, an archive must have at least one hash, otherwise this is considered an error. NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR makes it so that this is not an error that an archive does not have a hash, but won't bar the existing hashes to be checked.
It's on my TODO to add hashes for the kernel.
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
Quoted 17 lines
For u-boot (and barebox for that matter), this also used to be the case,
but nowadays you can very often get away with just using the upstream version. In this case, the hash is indeed valuable.Cc-ing Yann, our hash expert :-)
Regards,
ArnoutSignature · 6 lines
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF
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. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
RFC PATCH 1/1 U-Boot: don't check hashes for U-Boot external patches
In reply to julien.boibessot at free.frJulien, All,
On 2016-04-14 16:32 +0200, julien.boibessot at free.fr spake thusly:
Quoted 6 lines
From: Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>
BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCHallows user to give URL of patches on the Web, but in that case BR dl infra tries to compare hashes of the downloaded patches with the infos from boot/uboot/uboot.hash.
So, for that case (user specified patches), tell BR not to check hashes.
You've had some suggestions from Arnout. Care to update your patch and re-submit it, please?
In the meantime, I'm marking it as "Changes Requestd" in our Patchwork.
Thanks!
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
Quoted 25 lines
Signed-off-by Julien BOIBESSOT <[email protected]>--- boot/uboot/uboot.mk | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)boot/uboot/uboot.mk +2
-0@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ UBOOT_POST_RSYNC_HOOKS += UBOOT_COPY_OLD_LICENSE_FILE # directories or files. UBOOT_PATCHES = $(call qstrip,$(BR2_TARGET_UBOOT_PATCH)) UBOOT_PATCH = $(filter ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME = $(notdir $(UBOOT_PATCHES)) +BR_NO_CHECK_HASH_FOR += $(UBOOT_PATCHES_NAME) define UBOOT_APPLY_LOCAL_PATCHES for p in $(filter-out ftp://% http://% https://%,$(UBOOT_PATCHES)) ; do \Signature · 6 lines
2.1.4 _______________________________________________ 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. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'