Patchwork [04/15] file: replace obsolete automake macros with working ones

Add obsolete-automake-macros.patch that replaces automake macros
no longer supported by automake-1.13 with modern constructs.

Signed-off-by: Marko Lindqvist <cazfi74@gmail.com>
---
 .../file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch            |   15 +++++++++++++++
 meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb                 |    3 ++-
 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch

On 01/03/2013 12:36 PM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
> Add obsolete-automake-macros.patch that replaces automake macros
> no longer supported by automake-1.13 with modern constructs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marko Lindqvist <cazfi74@gmail.com>
> ---
>   .../file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch            |   15 +++++++++++++++
>   meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb                 |    3 ++-
>   2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>   create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
>
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..61ee062
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
> +Upstream-status: Not sent
> +
What does "Not sent" mean here?  Is it Pending? You plan to submit it?

Also the correct Tag is "Upstream-Status" both caps.

Sau!

> +Signed-off-by: Marko Lindqvist <cazfi74@gmail.com>
> +diff -Nurd file-5.11/configure.ac file-5.11/configure.ac
> +--- file-5.11/configure.ac	2012-02-21 21:16:29.000000000 +0200
> ++++ file-5.11/configure.ac	2013-01-02 07:18:23.004856505 +0200
> +@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
> + AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE()
> + m4_ifdef([AM_SILENT_RULES], [AM_SILENT_RULES([yes])])
> +
> +-AM_CONFIG_HEADER(config.h)
> ++AC_CONFIG_HEADERS(config.h)
> + AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR([m4])
> +
> + AC_MSG_CHECKING(for builtin ELF support)
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb
> index be6a863..52ae460 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb
> @@ -10,10 +10,11 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;beginline=2;md5=6a7382872edb68d33e1a9398b6e03
>
>   DEPENDS = "zlib file-native"
>   DEPENDS_class-native = "zlib-native"
> -PR = "r0"
> +PR = "r1"
>
>   SRC_URI = "ftp://ftp.astron.com/pub/file/file-${PV}.tar.gz \
>              file://fix_version_check.patch \
> +           file://obsolete_automake_macros.patch \
>              file://dump \
>              file://filesystems"
>
>

On 4 January 2013 20:23, Marko Lindqvist <cazfi74@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 January 2013 20:08, Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On 01/03/2013 12:36 PM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
>>>
>>> Add obsolete-automake-macros.patch that replaces automake macros
>>> no longer supported by automake-1.13 with modern constructs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Marko Lindqvist <cazfi74@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>   .../file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch            |   15
>>> +++++++++++++++
>>>   meta/recipes-devtools/file/file_5.11.bb                 |    3 ++-
>>>   2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>   create mode 100644
>>> meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
>>>
>>> diff --git
>>> a/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
>>> b/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..61ee062
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/file/file/obsolete_automake_macros.patch
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
>>> +Upstream-status: Not sent
>>> +
>>
>> What does "Not sent" mean here?  Is it Pending? You plan to submit it?
>
>  It meant that I'm about to send it. I sent all the other such patches
> to upstreams (and updated Upstream-Statuses) as a last thing before I
> sent patch series to oe. But with "file" I noticed that they had
> released new version just while I were working. So I left it to wait
> for me to check if patch is still needed upstream. It isn't - simply
> updating to new upstream version could be solution for oe. I'm only a
> bit worried about release announcement wording that release with such
> big internal changes is for the adventurous - others should stick to
> previous release.

 Checking "file" mailing list now a couple of days after the release
it seems the warning was in order - many reggressions reported. So I
guess we stick to patching old 5.11 version.


 - ML