libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
PATCH 1/1 libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
Drop upstream patches.
Add a patch fixing build with musl libc.
Update the list of licenses based on the content of COPYING. The BSD-5-Clause license is not listed by SPDX, but that is its name in the COPYING file.
Update the license file hash: new licenses, dates update, reformat.
--- ...laration-protection-for-glibc-alread.patch | 80 ------ ...0001-flopen-fix-build-with-musl-libc.patch | 40 +++ ...2-Fix-build-for-openrisc-with-uClibc.patch | 48 ---- ...3-Handle-systems-missing-sys-cdefs.h.patch | 230 ------------------ package/libbsd/libbsd.hash | 6 +- package/libbsd/libbsd.mk | 5 +- 6 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 363 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 package/libbsd/0001-Fix-function-declaration-protection-for-glibc-alread.patch create mode 100644 package/libbsd/0001-flopen-fix-build-with-musl-libc.patch delete mode 100644 package/libbsd/0002-Fix-build-for-openrisc-with-uClibc.patch delete mode 100644 package/libbsd/0003-Handle-systems-missing-sys-cdefs.h.patch
package/libbsd/0001-Fix-function-declaration-protection-for-glibc-alread.patch deleted +0 -80
@@ -1,80 +0,0 @@ -From 1f8a3f7bccfc84b195218ad0086ebd57049c3490 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 -From: Guillem Jover <[email protected]> -Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 01:39:45 +0100 -Subject: [PATCH] Fix function declaration protection for glibc already - providing them -MIME-Version: 1.0 -Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit - -On non-glibc based systems we cannot unconditionally use the -__GLIBC_PREREQ macro as it gets expanded before evaluation. Instead, -if it is undefined, define it to 0. - -We should also always declare these functions on non-glibc based -systems. And on systems with a new enough glibc, which provides these -functions, we should still provide the declarations if _GNU_SOURCE -is *not* defined. - -Backported from: -https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libbsd/patch/?id=1f8a3f7bccfc84b195218ad0086ebd57049c3490 - -Reported-by: J?rg Krause <[email protected]> -Signed-off-by: Guillem Jover <[email protected]> -Signed-off-by: J?rg Krause <[email protected]> ---- - include/bsd/stdlib.h | 3 ++- - include/bsd/string.h | 3 ++- - include/bsd/sys/cdefs.h | 8 ++++++++ - 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) - -diff --git a/include/bsd/stdlib.h b/include/bsd/stdlib.h -index 8d33d1f..a5b063c 100644 ---- a/include/bsd/stdlib.h -+++ b/include/bsd/stdlib.h -@@ -71,7 +71,8 @@ int sradixsort(const unsigned char **base, int nmemb, - const unsigned char *table, unsigned endbyte); - - void *reallocf(void *ptr, size_t size); --#if defined(_GNU_SOURCE) && defined(__GLIBC__) && !__GLIBC_PREREQ(2, 26) -+#if !defined(__GLIBC__) || \ -+ (defined(__GLIBC__) && (!__GLIBC_PREREQ(2, 26) || !defined(_GNU_SOURCE))) - void *reallocarray(void *ptr, size_t nmemb, size_t size); - #endif - -diff --git a/include/bsd/string.h b/include/bsd/string.h -index 29097f6..f987fee 100644 ---- a/include/bsd/string.h -+++ b/include/bsd/string.h -@@ -46,7 +46,8 @@ size_t strlcat(char *dst, const char *src, size_t siz); - char *strnstr(const char *str, const char *find, size_t str_len); - void strmode(mode_t mode, char *str); - --#if defined(_GNU_SOURCE) && defined(__GLIBC__) && !__GLIBC_PREREQ(2, 25) -+#if !defined(__GLIBC__) || \ -+ (defined(__GLIBC__) && (!__GLIBC_PREREQ(2, 25) || !defined(_GNU_SOURCE))) - void explicit_bzero(void *buf, size_t len); - #endif - __END_DECLS -diff --git a/include/bsd/sys/cdefs.h b/include/bsd/sys/cdefs.h -index b4c8f30..d1cc419 100644 ---- a/include/bsd/sys/cdefs.h -+++ b/include/bsd/sys/cdefs.h -@@ -58,6 +58,14 @@ - #endif - #endif - -+/* -+ * On non-glibc based systems, we cannot unconditionally use the -+ * __GLIBC_PREREQ macro as it gets expanded before evaluation. -+ */ -+#ifndef __GLIBC_PREREQ -+#define __GLIBC_PREREQ(maj, min) 0 -+#endif -+ - /* - * Some kFreeBSD headers expect those macros to be set for sanity checks. - */ --- -2.16.2 -
package/libbsd/0001-flopen-fix-build-with-musl-libc.patch new file +40 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ +From 8575450b9c1226fc38196b29e33c67f2b58cacf5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Baruch Siach <[email protected]> +Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 19:18:47 +0300 +Subject: [PATCH] flopen: fix build with musl libc +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit + +Commit 993828d84ee (Add flopenat() function from FreeBSD) dropped the +fcntl.h header. This breaks the build with musl libc: + +flopen.c: In function ?vflopenat?: +flopen.c:60:14: error: ?O_CREAT? undeclared (first use in this function) + if (flags & O_CREAT) { + ^~~~~~~ + +Restore the fcntl.h header include to fix the build. + +Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <[email protected]> +--- +Upstream status: sent to libbsd at lists.freedesktop.org + + src/flopen.c | 1 + + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) + +diff --git a/src/flopen.c b/src/flopen.c +index b9972c94ec90..ff20d074445b 100644 +--- a/src/flopen.c ++++ b/src/flopen.c +@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ + #include <sys/stat.h> + + #include <errno.h> ++#include <fcntl.h> + #include <stdarg.h> + #include <unistd.h> + +-- +2.17.1 +
package/libbsd/0002-Fix-build-for-openrisc-with-uClibc.patch deleted +0 -48
48 lines not on this page · raw message
package/libbsd/0003-Handle-systems-missing-sys-cdefs.h.patch deleted +0 -230
230 lines not on this page · raw message
package/libbsd/libbsd.hash +3 -3
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ -# From https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libbsd/2018-January/000166.html -sha256 f548f10e5af5a08b1e22889ce84315b1ebe41505b015c9596bad03fd13a12b31 libbsd-0.8.7.tar.xz -sha256 0b6cedd686394f9c811a6a9fd314d68ab4738475ad3d9df61154259fa649a2a7 COPYING +# From https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libbsd/2018-May/000190.html +sha256 56d835742327d69faccd16955a60b6dcf30684a8da518c4eca0ac713b9e0a7a4 libbsd-0.9.1.tar.xz +sha256 df6d8e1b5b3a5b06376c658c8ad3afc82687f1c0e0404cec4738ad14b2675708 COPYING
package/libbsd/libbsd.mk +3 -2
@@ -4,10 +4,11 @@ # ################################################################################ -LIBBSD_VERSION = 0.8.7 +LIBBSD_VERSION = 0.9.1 LIBBSD_SOURCE = libbsd-$(LIBBSD_VERSION).tar.xz LIBBSD_SITE = https://archive.hadrons.org/software/libbsd -LIBBSD_LICENSE = BSD-3-Clause, MIT +LIBBSD_LICENSE = BSD-2-Clause, BSD-3-Clause, BSD-4-Clause, BSD-5-Clause, \ + MIT, ISC, Beerware LIBBSD_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING LIBBSD_INSTALL_STAGING = YES
Signature · 1 line
2.17.1
PATCH 1/1 libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
Hello,
Quoted 7 lines · Baruch Siach
Drop upstream patches.
Add a patch fixing build with musl libc.
Update the list of licenses based on the content of COPYING. The BSD-5-Clause license is not listed by SPDX, but that is its name in the COPYING file.
The license seems to really be
BSD-5-clause-Peter-Wemm
because the license text itself refers to Peter Wemm.
Yocto is really using a longer list of licenses:
https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/plain/meta/recipes-support/libbsd/libbsd_0.8.7.bb
For now I've applied your patch, because it's definitely not worse than what we have, but perhaps we want to make it even better.
Thanks!
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
PATCH 1/1 libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
Hi Thomas,
Quoted 9 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Quoted 7 lines · Baruch Siach
Drop upstream patches.
Add a patch fixing build with musl libc.
Update the list of licenses based on the content of COPYING. The BSD-5-Clause license is not listed by SPDX, but that is its name in the COPYING file.
Quoted 5 lines
The license seems to really be
BSD-5-clause-Peter-Wemm
because the license text itself refers to Peter Wemm.
The libbsd COPYING fine appends the copyright holder to a number of common licenses like BSD-3-clause-John-Birrell and BSD-4-clause-Niels-Provos. That's probably because each COPYING entry lists specific files with their copyright holders. We usually only use the SPDX identifier string. So I don't think there is a reason to do that for this license.
Quoted 2 lines
Yocto is really using a longer list of licenses:
https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/plain/meta/recipes-support/libbsd/libbsd_0.8.7.bb
The full list is only in a comment, AFAICS. The actual effective line is rather shorter than what we have following this patch:
LICENSE = "BSD-4-Clause & ISC & PD"
Quoted 2 lines
For now I've applied your patch, because it's definitely not worse than what we have, but perhaps we want to make it even better.
baruch
Signature · 3 lines
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -PATCH 1/1 libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
Hello,
Quoted 6 lines · Baruch Siach
Quoted 1 line
because the license text itself refers to Peter Wemm.
The libbsd COPYING fine appends the copyright holder to a number of common licenses like BSD-3-clause-John-Birrell and BSD-4-clause-Niels-Provos. That's probably because each COPYING entry lists specific files with their copyright holders.
Correct.
Quoted 2 lines
We usually only use the SPDX identifier string. So I don't think there is a reason to do that for this license.
Well, normally an SPDX identifier string refers to a specific version of the license. If the license text is different (even for subtle reasons), the SPDX identifier string should probably be different.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Yocto is really using a longer list of licenses:
https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/plain/meta/recipes-support/libbsd/libbsd_0.8.7.bbThe full list is only in a comment, AFAICS.
True, indeed, I had missed that.
Quoted 4 lines
The actual effective line is
rather shorter than what we have following this patch:LICENSE = "BSD-4-Clause & ISC & PD"
I also think it is good enough. But I wanted to point out that the licensing is in fact a bit more complicated. I personally don't see the need of having a more detailed LIBBSD_LICENSE description, but I wanted to point this out so that others can comment on this (Arnout, Yann, Peter).
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
PATCH 1/1 libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
Thomas, Baruch, All,
On 2018-06-06 07:58 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
Quoted 1 line · Baruch Siach
[--SNIP--]
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
The actual effective line is
rather shorter than what we have following this patch:
LICENSE = "BSD-4-Clause & ISC & PD"I also think it is good enough. But I wanted to point out that the licensing is in fact a bit more complicated. I personally don't see the need of having a more detailed
LIBBSD_LICENSEdescription, but I wanted to point this out so that others can comment on this (Arnout, Yann, Peter).
From https://libbsd.freedesktop.org/wiki/ :
"Most of the licenses are either ISC, MIT, Beerware, BSD-2-clause, BSD-3-clause, and BSD-4-clause [...]"
So, we should probably at least list just those:
LIBBSD_LICENSE = ISC, MIT, Beerware, BSD-2-clause, BSD-3-clause, BSD-4-clause
My $0.02...
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
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 libbsd: bump to version 0.9.1
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniQuoted 11 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello,
Quoted 6 lines · Baruch Siach
Quoted 1 line
because the license text itself refers to Peter Wemm.
The libbsd COPYING fine appends the copyright holder to a number of common licenses like BSD-3-clause-John-Birrell and BSD-4-clause-Niels-Provos. That's probably because each COPYING entry lists specific files with their copyright holders.
Quoted 8 lines
Correct.
Quoted 2 lines
We usually only use the SPDX identifier string. So I don't think there is a reason to do that for this license.
Well, normally an SPDX identifier string refers to a specific version of the license. If the license text is different (even for subtle reasons), the SPDX identifier string should probably be different.
Indeed, but at the moment we don't follow that rule at all. Our license tags
are really just a hint, they're still a long way off from a full SPDX spec.
Regards,
Arnout
[snip]
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