From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 12:03:05 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v4] package/libtalloc: new package In-Reply-To: References: <20201014170254.6184-1-dgouarin@gmail.com> <20201015200609.20205-1-dgouarin@gmail.com> <20201015221657.7a224c6a@windsurf> Message-ID: <20201016120305.23b2c455@windsurf> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello David, On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:25:26 +0200 david gouarin wrote: > I agree, HOST_DIR is completely wrong here, I totally missed that, and I > admit I still have difficulties formatting my patches, mainly because I > have to work in an isolated network :) Ah, indeed, that may be not the most efficient way of working :/ > I have however sent a new revision for both freeradius and libtalloc as a > series using git send-email as described in the documentation, I don't > understand what is wrong ? They are not numbered: you probably used "git format-patch -N", but you shouldn't use the -N option in this case. For patches sent to Buildroot, we want them numbered, so they clearly appear as a series and we understand that they depend on each other. For patches to Buildroot packages (i.e patches in package/foo/*.patch), we want them *NOT* numbered, as otherwise the 2/3 or 5/6 numbering very quickly gets out of date when adding/removing patches, and this numbering is already sufficiently explicit by the name of the patches (0001-something.patch, 0002-something-else.patch). Perhaps this is what caused the confusion ? Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com