From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:09:05 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/xfsprogs: install in the same location as e2fsprogs In-Reply-To: <20160525231110.648f963a@free-electrons.com> References: <1464096676-41655-1-git-send-email-ckhardin@exablox.com> <20160525231110.648f963a@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20160609220905.41f050b5@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 25 May 2016 23:11:10 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > On Tue, 24 May 2016 06:31:16 -0700, Charles Hardin wrote: > > The configure script hard codes "/sbin" for installation which > > installs the XFS tools in a different location then the e2fsprogs. > > > > This is just a cosmetic patch so all the tools end up in "/usr/sbin" > > for consistency. > > > > Signed-off-by: Charles Hardin > > What is the motivation for this change? If the upstream xfsprogs > developers think it should be installed in /sbin, why should we change > it? > > In any case, the patch itself needs a description + your Signed-off-by > line. Also, it should be submitted to the upstream xfsprogs developers > to see if they might accept it. Otherwise I think we would prefer to > keep the existing behavior. Since there was no reply to my questions, I've marked this patch as "Rejected" in our patch tracking system. Do not hesitate to resend an updated version that takes into account the comments and that provides a more detailed justification. Thanks for your contribution! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com