Apply the current patch with git am, modify the files which need to be modified, mark them with git add, amend the original commit with git commit --amend and use git send-email -1 to send it.
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Gerhard de Clercq < [email protected]> wrote: > I guess I'm the only one still stuck on 0.1 but I'll try to send in a > patch for whoever also comes to need this. I would appreciate some advice > with regards to how I should submit a patch because this is in fact a patch > on a patch file which is something quite strange if you ask me. > > I tried to modify the actual patch file manually but that did not go to > well. I ended up just applying the current patch to a clean repo clone, > copying my modified files to it and then just saving "git diff" to a file > to create a newer version of that patch. This does not generate a nice > header block like the old patch file had but it does seem to work. Is the > header important and if so, how should I generate it? > > One I have this new patch, should I simply replace contents of the old > file with the new one's and run "git send-email". That would seem normal > but with this being a patch on a patch file it will look like a complete > mess considering the new one is not even really derived from the old one. > > > Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 00:01:53 +0100 > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [oe] [meta-qt5] GStreamer-1.0 path breaking 0.1 support > > > > FWIW: there is also: > > http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/88555/ > > > > also still waiting for v3 and I don't know if it was tested with 0.10 > > gstreamer. > > > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Otherwise, why is the patch that seems to have been accepted in 2014 > to > > > fix the 1.0 breaking 0.1 support not been implemented in the layer yet? > > > > > > It's incorrectly marked as Accepted in patchwork, but it was never > merged > > > into the repository, because the author never sent v2 with review > comments > > > from me resolved. > > > > > > There was another patch: > > > http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/85075/ > > > which was merged and nobody was reporting broken 0.10 support since > then. > > > I'm not using 0.10 version, so I was assuming it works now for people > who > > > do. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Gerhard de Clercq < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I've just wasted a lot of time trying to get qtmultimedia to compile > on a > > >> Fido build using the Fido branch of meta-qt5. After a lot of > tinkering I > > >> finally got it working and have found that the problem was caused by > the > > >> 0001-Initial-porting-effort-to-GStreamer-1.0.patch file that ships > with the > > >> layer. I initially didn't realize that the troublesome code was > coming from > > >> it and debugged the cached source (which it seems is patched) until it > > >> worked. I didn't think it would be so easy but a patch > > >> http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/79531/ I found from 2014 > > >> completely told me how to correct the source. > > >> > > >> What bothers me is how can this can be possible. Are the recipes > designed > > >> not to apply the patch to non 1.0 build and if so, what could prevent > that > > >> from working? Otherwise, why is the patch that seems to have been > accepted > > >> in 2014 to fix the 1.0 breaking 0.1 support not been implemented in > the > > >> layer yet? > > >> > > >> PS. I see the patch file has changed a bit after Fido but > unfortunately > > >> Fido is the latest that my board supports at the moment and I have > not been > > >> able to test with a newer version. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Gerhard de Clercq > > >> -- > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Openembedded-devel mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > > Openembedded-devel mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > > -- > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
