[1/1] opkg 0.1.8: do_fetch failed since no checksum specified

Submitted by Robert Yang on June 7, 2012, 9:24 a.m. | Patch ID: 29373

Details

Message ID 5f256583bca8c2d4225c379cc9b7ca23f374dcdc.1339051007.git.liezhi.yang@windriver.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Robert Yang June 7, 2012, 9:24 a.m. 
* We use meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb by default, the
  opkg_0.1.8.bb failed since no checksum specified.

* The add_vercmp.patch in both opkg/ and opkg-0.1.8/, remove the one
  in opkg-0.1.8/

This patch doesn't impact the output, so I think that we don't have to
increment the PR.

[YOCTO #2498]

Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
---
 .../opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch               |   36 --------------------
 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb           |    5 ++-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch

Patch hide | download patch | download mbox 

diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index c3396d5..0000000
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@ 
-Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [other]
-
-Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.c
-===================================================================
---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
-+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:40:34.000000000 +0000
-@@ -876,3 +876,18 @@
- 
- 	return ret;
- }
-+
-+int
-+opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2)
-+{
-+  pkg_t *pkg1, *pkg2;
-+
-+  pkg1 = pkg_new();
-+  pkg2 = pkg_new();
-+
-+  parse_version(pkg1, ver1);
-+  parse_version(pkg2, ver2);
-+
-+  return pkg_compare_versions(pkg1, pkg2);
-+}
-+
-Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.h
-===================================================================
---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
-+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:35:19.000000000 +0000
-@@ -58,4 +58,6 @@
- 
- int opkg_repository_accessibility_check(void);
- 
-+int opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2);
-+
- #endif /* OPKG_H */
diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
index c206b37..785b6ca 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
@@ -1,8 +1,11 @@ 
 require opkg.inc
 
 SRC_URI = "http://opkg.googlecode.com/files/opkg-${PV}.tar.gz \
-           file://add_vercmp.patch \
+           file://opkg/add_vercmp.patch \
            file://headerfix.patch \
           "
 
+SRC_URI[md5sum] = "c714ce0e4863bf1315e3b6913ffe3299"
+SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "ff94bf30bd662d49c4b5057e3a0818d062731adaa555d59abd677ec32a3c1c60"
+
 PR = "${INC_PR}.0"

Comments

Martin Jansa June 7, 2012, 9:31 a.m. 
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 05:24:39PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote:
> * We use meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb by default, the
>   opkg_0.1.8.bb failed since no checksum specified.
> 
> * The add_vercmp.patch in both opkg/ and opkg-0.1.8/, remove the one
>   in opkg-0.1.8/
> 
> This patch doesn't impact the output, so I think that we don't have to
> increment the PR.
> 
> [YOCTO #2498]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
> ---
>  .../opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch               |   36 --------------------
>  meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb           |    5 ++-
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>  delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
> 
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
> deleted file mode 100644
> index c3396d5..0000000
> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
> +++ /dev/null
> @@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
> -Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [other]
> -
> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.c
> -===================================================================
> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:40:34.000000000 +0000
> -@@ -876,3 +876,18 @@
> - 
> - 	return ret;
> - }
> -+
> -+int
> -+opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2)
> -+{
> -+  pkg_t *pkg1, *pkg2;
> -+
> -+  pkg1 = pkg_new();
> -+  pkg2 = pkg_new();
> -+
> -+  parse_version(pkg1, ver1);
> -+  parse_version(pkg2, ver2);
> -+
> -+  return pkg_compare_versions(pkg1, pkg2);
> -+}
> -+
> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.h
> -===================================================================
> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:35:19.000000000 +0000
> -@@ -58,4 +58,6 @@
> - 
> - int opkg_repository_accessibility_check(void);
> - 
> -+int opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2);
> -+
> - #endif /* OPKG_H */
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
> index c206b37..785b6ca 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
> @@ -1,8 +1,11 @@
>  require opkg.inc
>  
>  SRC_URI = "http://opkg.googlecode.com/files/opkg-${PV}.tar.gz \
> -           file://add_vercmp.patch \
> +           file://opkg/add_vercmp.patch \

is this "opkg/" really needed?

>             file://headerfix.patch \
>            "
>  
> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "c714ce0e4863bf1315e3b6913ffe3299"
> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "ff94bf30bd662d49c4b5057e3a0818d062731adaa555d59abd677ec32a3c1c60"
> +
>  PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
> -- 
> 1.7.1
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Saul Wold June 7, 2012, 12:03 p.m. 
On 06/07/2012 02:31 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 05:24:39PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote:
>> * We use meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb by default, the
>>    opkg_0.1.8.bb failed since no checksum specified.
>>
>> * The add_vercmp.patch in both opkg/ and opkg-0.1.8/, remove the one
>>    in opkg-0.1.8/
>>
>> This patch doesn't impact the output, so I think that we don't have to
>> increment the PR.
>>
>> [YOCTO #2498]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Yang<liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
>> ---
>>   .../opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch               |   36 --------------------
>>   meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb           |    5 ++-
>>   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>>   delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>> deleted file mode 100644
>> index c3396d5..0000000
>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>> +++ /dev/null
>> @@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
>> -Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [other]
>> -
>> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.c
>> -===================================================================
>> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
>> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:40:34.000000000 +0000
>> -@@ -876,3 +876,18 @@
>> -
>> - 	return ret;
>> - }
>> -+
>> -+int
>> -+opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2)
>> -+{
>> -+  pkg_t *pkg1, *pkg2;
>> -+
>> -+  pkg1 = pkg_new();
>> -+  pkg2 = pkg_new();
>> -+
>> -+  parse_version(pkg1, ver1);
>> -+  parse_version(pkg2, ver2);
>> -+
>> -+  return pkg_compare_versions(pkg1, pkg2);
>> -+}
>> -+
>> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.h
>> -===================================================================
>> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
>> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:35:19.000000000 +0000
>> -@@ -58,4 +58,6 @@
>> -
>> - int opkg_repository_accessibility_check(void);
>> -
>> -+int opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2);
>> -+
>> - #endif /* OPKG_H */
>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>> index c206b37..785b6ca 100644
>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>> @@ -1,8 +1,11 @@
>>   require opkg.inc
>>
>>   SRC_URI = "http://opkg.googlecode.com/files/opkg-${PV}.tar.gz \
>> -           file://add_vercmp.patch \
>> +           file://opkg/add_vercmp.patch \
>
> is this "opkg/" really needed?
>
If it's getting removed, is it needed at all?

Sau!

>>              file://headerfix.patch \
>>             "
>>
>> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "c714ce0e4863bf1315e3b6913ffe3299"
>> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "ff94bf30bd662d49c4b5057e3a0818d062731adaa555d59abd677ec32a3c1c60"
>> +
>>   PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
>> --
>> 1.7.1
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Robert Yang June 7, 2012, 11:51 p.m. 
On 06/07/2012 05:31 PM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 05:24:39PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote:
>> * We use meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb by default, the
>>    opkg_0.1.8.bb failed since no checksum specified.
>>
>> * The add_vercmp.patch in both opkg/ and opkg-0.1.8/, remove the one
>>    in opkg-0.1.8/
>>
>> This patch doesn't impact the output, so I think that we don't have to
>> increment the PR.
>>
>> [YOCTO #2498]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Yang<liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
>> ---
>>   .../opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch               |   36 --------------------
>>   meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb           |    5 ++-
>>   2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>>   delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>> deleted file mode 100644
>> index c3396d5..0000000
>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>> +++ /dev/null
>> @@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
>> -Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [other]
>> -
>> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.c
>> -===================================================================
>> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
>> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.c	2010-01-26 20:40:34.000000000 +0000
>> -@@ -876,3 +876,18 @@
>> -
>> - 	return ret;
>> - }
>> -+
>> -+int
>> -+opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2)
>> -+{
>> -+  pkg_t *pkg1, *pkg2;
>> -+
>> -+  pkg1 = pkg_new();
>> -+  pkg2 = pkg_new();
>> -+
>> -+  parse_version(pkg1, ver1);
>> -+  parse_version(pkg2, ver2);
>> -+
>> -+  return pkg_compare_versions(pkg1, pkg2);
>> -+}
>> -+
>> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.h
>> -===================================================================
>> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
>> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.h	2010-01-26 20:35:19.000000000 +0000
>> -@@ -58,4 +58,6 @@
>> -
>> - int opkg_repository_accessibility_check(void);
>> -
>> -+int opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2);
>> -+
>> - #endif /* OPKG_H */
>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>> index c206b37..785b6ca 100644
>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>> @@ -1,8 +1,11 @@
>>   require opkg.inc
>>
>>   SRC_URI = "http://opkg.googlecode.com/files/opkg-${PV}.tar.gz \
>> -           file://add_vercmp.patch \
>> +           file://opkg/add_vercmp.patch \
>
> is this "opkg/" really needed?
>

This seems strange, I did see a WARNING yesterday which said that it can't
find opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch after I removed opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch,
I was curious why this happened, I guessed that this was because there was a
opkg-0.1.8/ directory, and I was thinking whether this was a bug of do_fetch,
but today, I can't reproduce the WARNING, even I added the
opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch back, built opkg, removed the
opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch, built opkg again.

I removed the "opkg/" and pushed the commit to:

   git://git.pokylinux.org/poky-contrib robert/opkg_sum
   http://git.pokylinux.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=robert/opkg_sum

// Robert

>>              file://headerfix.patch \
>>             "
>>
>> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "c714ce0e4863bf1315e3b6913ffe3299"
>> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "ff94bf30bd662d49c4b5057e3a0818d062731adaa555d59abd677ec32a3c1c60"
>> +
>>   PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
>> --
>> 1.7.1
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Robert Yang June 7, 2012, 11:54 p.m. 
On 06/07/2012 08:03 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 02:31 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 05:24:39PM +0800, Robert Yang wrote:
>>> * We use meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_svn.bb by default, the
>>> opkg_0.1.8.bb failed since no checksum specified.
>>>
>>> * The add_vercmp.patch in both opkg/ and opkg-0.1.8/, remove the one
>>> in opkg-0.1.8/
>>>
>>> This patch doesn't impact the output, so I think that we don't have to
>>> increment the PR.
>>>
>>> [YOCTO #2498]
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Robert Yang<liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
>>> ---
>>> .../opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch | 36 --------------------
>>> meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb | 5 ++-
>>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>>> delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>>>
>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>>> b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>>> deleted file mode 100644
>>> index c3396d5..0000000
>>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch
>>> +++ /dev/null
>>> @@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
>>> -Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [other]
>>> -
>>> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.c
>>> -===================================================================
>>> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.c 2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
>>> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.c 2010-01-26 20:40:34.000000000 +0000
>>> -@@ -876,3 +876,18 @@
>>> -
>>> - return ret;
>>> - }
>>> -+
>>> -+int
>>> -+opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2)
>>> -+{
>>> -+ pkg_t *pkg1, *pkg2;
>>> -+
>>> -+ pkg1 = pkg_new();
>>> -+ pkg2 = pkg_new();
>>> -+
>>> -+ parse_version(pkg1, ver1);
>>> -+ parse_version(pkg2, ver2);
>>> -+
>>> -+ return pkg_compare_versions(pkg1, pkg2);
>>> -+}
>>> -+
>>> -Index: trunk/libopkg/opkg.h
>>> -===================================================================
>>> ---- trunk.orig/libopkg/opkg.h 2010-01-26 20:32:19.000000000 +0000
>>> -+++ trunk/libopkg/opkg.h 2010-01-26 20:35:19.000000000 +0000
>>> -@@ -58,4 +58,6 @@
>>> -
>>> - int opkg_repository_accessibility_check(void);
>>> -
>>> -+int opkg_compare_versions (const char *ver1, const char *ver2);
>>> -+
>>> - #endif /* OPKG_H */
>>> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>>> b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>>> index c206b37..785b6ca 100644
>>> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>>> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/opkg/opkg_0.1.8.bb
>>> @@ -1,8 +1,11 @@
>>> require opkg.inc
>>>
>>> SRC_URI = "http://opkg.googlecode.com/files/opkg-${PV}.tar.gz \
>>> - file://add_vercmp.patch \
>>> + file://opkg/add_vercmp.patch \
>>
>> is this "opkg/" really needed?
>>
> If it's getting removed, is it needed at all?
>

I removed the opkg-0.1.8/add_vercmp.patch to let it use the 
opkg/add_vercmp.patch, so this line is needed, but the "opkg/"
is not needed, I have updated this and pushed to git repo.

// Robert


> Sau!
>
>>> file://headerfix.patch \
>>> "
>>>
>>> +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "c714ce0e4863bf1315e3b6913ffe3299"
>>> +SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
>>> "ff94bf30bd662d49c4b5057e3a0818d062731adaa555d59abd677ec32a3c1c60"
>>> +
>>> PR = "${INC_PR}.0"
>>> --
>>> 1.7.1
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>