Lo! Quick question on a spec file detail:
On 28.01.2017 16:20, [email protected] wrote:
> From fd6460a8d81a3dc5242b43097a3c96db6737ff3b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Laura Abbott <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 16:16:56 +0100
> Subject: Temporary workaround for gcc7 and arm64
>
> See
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-October/461597.html
> ---
> 0001-Work-around-for-gcc7-and-arm64.patch | 62
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel.spec | 8 +++-
> 2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 0001-Work-around-for-gcc7-and-arm64.patch
>
> diff --git a/0001-Work-around-for-gcc7-and-arm64.patch
> b/0001-Work-around-for-gcc7-and-arm64.patch
> […]
> diff --git a/kernel.spec b/kernel.spec
> index e31e39c..3e212ce 100644
> --- a/kernel.spec
> +++ b/kernel.spec
> […]
> +# See
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-October/461597.html
> +Patch853: 0001-Work-around-for-gcc7-and-arm64.patch
> +
With the current spec file mechanics the above patch won't be applied
when the srpm for example is rebuild with "--with nopatches". Such a
rebuild thus will fail on rawhide currently due to gcc7 :-/ ran into
this on x86-32/-64 when building by vanilla packages.
No big deal for me, nevertheless a quick question: Until a year or two
ago that didn't happen: The spec file had a few tricks to apply some of
the patches (for example those that fix know build/compiler problems)
all the time. That was lost when the spec file switched to using "git am
%{patches}" to apply patches.
Was that intentional? Laura, Justin: Would you be open to reintroduce
and use a similar method that would apply certain patches all the time?
If yes I'd might look into this sooner or later, as it would make my
life easier.
CU, knurd
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
