[Buildroot] [PATCH] gst1-plugins-bad: remove obsolete gettext patch

[Buildroot] [PATCH] gst1-plugins-bad: remove obsolete gettext patch

[Marcin Nowakowski]

The patch to update gettext version is unnecessary, as gettexttize is
enabled and therefore an always up-to-date version is used.

Signed-off-by: Marcin Nowakowski <marcin.nowakowski@imgtec.com>
---
 .../gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch        | 17 -----------------
 1 file changed, 17 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 package/gstreamer1/gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch

diff --git a/package/gstreamer1/gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch b/package/gstreamer1/gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index ebf4567..0000000
--- a/package/gstreamer1/gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-Use newer version of gettext to match current buildroot gettext.
-
-Signed-off-by: Spenser Gilliland <spenser@gillilanding.com>
-----
-Index: gst1-plugins-bad-1.1.1/po/Makefile.in.in
-===================================================================
---- gst1-plugins-bad-1.1.1.orig/po/Makefile.in.in
-+++ gst1-plugins-bad-1.1.1/po/Makefile.in.in
-@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
- # General Public License and is *not* in the public domain.
- #
- # Origin: gettext-0.17
--GETTEXT_MACRO_VERSION = 0.17
-+GETTEXT_MACRO_VERSION = 0.18
- 
- PACKAGE = @PACKAGE@
- VERSION = @VERSION@
-- 
2.8.2

[Buildroot] [PATCH] gst1-plugins-bad: remove obsolete gettext patch

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Marcin" == Marcin Nowakowski <marcin.nowakowski@imgtec.com> writes:

 > The patch to update gettext version is unnecessary, as gettexttize is
 > enabled and therefore an always up-to-date version is used.

Hmm, but why are we patching this + autoreconf/gettextize in the first
place when we don't do it for the other gstreamer1 packages?

Looking back in the history, I see Yann added GETTEXTIZE in 368eab1833
to work around an issue doing autoreconf, but now we don't seem to have
any reason to autoreconf in the first place any more.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] [PATCH] gst1-plugins-bad: remove obsolete gettext patch

[Marcin Nowakowski]

> From: Peter Korsgaard
> 
> Hmm, but why are we patching this + autoreconf/gettextize in the first
> place when we don't do it for the other gstreamer1 packages?
> 
> Looking back in the history, I see Yann added GETTEXTIZE in 368eab1833
> to work around an issue doing autoreconf, but now we don't seem to have
> any reason to autoreconf in the first place any more.

It does indeed look like it's unnecessary now - in that case I'll post a new patch that removes the patch file as well as removes autoreconf and gettextize steps.

Marcin

[Buildroot] [PATCH] gst1-plugins-bad: remove obsolete gettext patch

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Marcin" == Marcin Nowakowski <Marcin.Nowakowski@imgtec.com> writes:

 >> From: Peter Korsgaard
 >> 
 >> Hmm, but why are we patching this + autoreconf/gettextize in the first
 >> place when we don't do it for the other gstreamer1 packages?
 >> 
 >> Looking back in the history, I see Yann added GETTEXTIZE in 368eab1833
 >> to work around an issue doing autoreconf, but now we don't seem to have
 >> any reason to autoreconf in the first place any more.

 > It does indeed look like it's unnecessary now - in that case I'll post
 > a new patch that removes the patch file as well as removes autoreconf
 > and gettextize steps.

Great, thanks!

-- 
Venlig hilsen,
Peter Korsgaard 

[Buildroot] [PATCH] gst1-plugins-bad: remove obsolete gettext patch

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 10:45:27 +0200, Marcin Nowakowski wrote:
> The patch to update gettext version is unnecessary, as gettexttize is
> enabled and therefore an always up-to-date version is used.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marcin Nowakowski <marcin.nowakowski@imgtec.com>
> ---
>  .../gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch        | 17 -----------------
>  1 file changed, 17 deletions(-)
>  delete mode 100644 package/gstreamer1/gst1-plugins-bad/0001-use-gettext-0.18.patch

Following the discussion with Peter Korsgaard, I've marked your patch
as "Changes Requested" in our patch tracking system. This means that
your patch is no longer in our queue of "pending" patches. So don't
forget to send an updated version :-)

Thanks a lot!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com