From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (yocto-www.yoctoproject.org [140.211.169.56]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.1436.1578512889390190530 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 11:48:12 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=fail reason="body hash did not verify" header.i=@rsi-elektrotechnik.de header.s=strato-dkim-0002 header.b=Rplz1rHn; spf=none, err=permanent DNS error (domain: rsi-elektrotechnik.de, ip: 140.211.169.56, mailfrom: prvs=12762c914d=holzmayr@rsi-elektrotechnik.de) Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 407FDE014C8; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:48:09 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no * trust * [81.169.146.163 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de (mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de [81.169.146.163]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B5E3E01405 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:48:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1578512884; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=rsi-elektrotechnik.de; h=In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=a2KvlmUpKz+joru7UbWssGUPzP4vCljTAN29BjfqXmU=; b=Rplz1rHn/lnNjZda8sv/akrT1LJT6ZfvZm+2kC1NSQfMzopX4FvTFRRzaB7lkOnUQz VR4EfaLWOHQ8T2xvKowpBJ/Jsox9mtLC3jY57D6I0VVxqaBb1FQhnJ4v8Ryq1DzhWXw3 0hWiG2xIRJB7U5g1cl+b7+bp+fRSAS6sywmoEG9TuE1MPQu/py93X7qJkCb9Fry9WKJG FGUL2IhUSlXUCKyRgpOzx4Tdlg4rBnLVLV5IKZzQVddsqlvXWLuoZumN2KhGAabw39fO RWwwzfRsx5QwLqCfmVNTKXu/8KEvsgrHSjojnazXHxefByIY/rl1qA8MEewSNgTE2v8I JPUA== X-RZG-AUTH: ":fz5RJhWIaexwuXGosGLfiBc0xYyi1Y5bd+wRKqrzPXw4V1/KqCOd+ZZzzoK8epFp9XQIUl6aPGQL" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from mail.rsi-elektrotechnik.de by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 46.1.4 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id R00cfaw08Jm40VT (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate); Wed, 8 Jan 2020 20:48:04 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; d=rsi-elektrotechnik.de; s=MDaemon; t=1578512883; x=1579117683; i=holzmayr@rsi-elektrotechnik.de; q=dns/txt; h=Date:From:To:Cc: Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To; bh=a2 KvlmUpKz+joru7UbWssGUPzP4vCljTAN29BjfqXmU=; b=LvKFcJ7NKATMdpSouz cPe2UuypY/r/P1TULZye+yn59sfCj7V2OzCh7VhPtJRH39/Yw2qTWw/nDGsNqt09 15UTi3vfgubuuKDZp1wH3beMwQfFwvJmAHGRN2+U70MqZmkaHpR6QQVD1LXXQ/IA i+TcNNiwUn/6jYH7r5nDhtcU0= Received: by mail.rsi-elektrotechnik.de (MDaemon PRO v19.5.3) with ESMTPSA id md50000231948.msg; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 20:48:03 +0100 X-MDRemoteIP: 178.27.65.232 X-MDHelo: jholzmayr.localdomain X-MDArrival-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 20:48:03 +0100 X-Authenticated-Sender: holzmayr@rsi-elektrotechnik.de X-Return-Path: prvs=12762c914d=holzmayr@rsi-elektrotechnik.de X-Envelope-From: holzmayr@rsi-elektrotechnik.de Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 20:47:50 +0100 From: "Josef Holzmayr" To: Chuck Wolber Cc: Yocto-mailing-list Subject: Re: [yocto] patchutils bitbake recipe Message-ID: <20200108194750.6tfneqdmfv6y67tp@jholzmayr.localdomain> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Howdy! On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 11:30:09AM -0800, Chuck Wolber wrote: > I checked the layer index (and google) and I find no references to a > bitbake recipe for patchutils. Was there a conscious decision to not > maintain a recipe for patchutils? Or is this something that simply need= s a > maintainer to step up and make it happen? Write a recipe and submit :) I don't think there was ever a "conscious decision" to not support a specific package for non-technical reasons. And this one doesn't also look like it has any noteworthy implications - its autotoolized and GPLv2. So a good one to get involved for sure. The only thing that *could* theoretically happen, is that if no usecase other than a very specific one of yours can be seen, that you are asked to keep it in a layer of your own instead of being accepted into meta-openembedded (because thats where it would have to go). Greetz --=20 =E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2= =80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94 Josef Holzmayr Software Developer Embedded Systems Tel: +49 8444 9204-48 Fax: +49 8444 9204-50 R-S-I Elektrotechnik GmbH & Co. KG Woelkestrasse 11 D-85301 Schweitenkirchen www.rsi-elektrotechnik.de =E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2= =80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94=E2=80=94 Amtsgericht Ingolstadt =E2=80=93 GmbH: HRB 191328 =E2=80=93 KG: HRA 17039= 3 Gesch=C3=A4ftsf=C3=BChrer: Dr.-Ing. Michael Sorg, Dipl.-Ing. Franz Sorg Ust-IdNr: DE 128592548=20 _____________________________________________________________ Amtsgericht Ingolstadt - GmbH: HRB 191328 - KG: HRA 170363 Gesch=C3=A4ftsf=C3=BChrer: Dr.-Ing. Michael Sorg, Dipl.-Ing. Franz Sorg USt-IdNr.: DE 128592548