From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39991C433EF for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF73241797; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XfOkETRIN-0c; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7020041927; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2271D1BF402 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC9440291 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mind.be Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YTpjFg5aU2lR for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F307E40135 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:24:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id kq17so5460502ejb.4 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:24:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mind.be; s=google; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uaM5DO7uKUM3X5gYR2SClVMQw4gqPiluNdJl1OUMCOA=; b=RVib33GZ4GnZFucmWCIn8H8W3z39t8WT+BkY97JPPnCRDGZRHXXWJjovs21RUnN8I5 +bWjbuPEiRMa96ONsIu5HmLl79rwls384gP/7uPCb6e7c/BQ4zqQvM6xu2llKd+XgxTN F9LDM7Tb9U3vxBqm/Wy7X3DqgZUBtFM5ISQCbgq5PigMX+uNmtvs2XW1A077hmW3wWoJ nnaax8AjCivIGjHLW3OEckEHfq1weFYudNUfdfwlAHcPeDbzDS1qu/2zQaHKKqFuY7wd XrM+mRYbNZN5IHVoO5FQ2uoSJoVFlGLoSr2B4RuelSuQeqLE8omWZMkUh1QoVgv20Gz+ njcw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uaM5DO7uKUM3X5gYR2SClVMQw4gqPiluNdJl1OUMCOA=; b=RvYHhN2oh+KUqYBoCkZn5POOr0VnyuPJzjKKJGk3nl4qBXl/20rBbjqEBTXq9cF/F4 j13v3qDspHlPswWgfm9f79Ed85uuTEYevJJrLPS2kIiipJ4YZPsgfXsKTaiHwMySW6VK 9gL8yGn64KqBFfGQ79DR5AaAM85vVZXhc8ZKivRjw8FYxnloQqkdtduvgRpDOIRfw1JJ tgD33lqR8WWWyWsV77B2zWm2QFJAyuVB603+tKyfkCTsAeIyTITJzTAPASsrwl9mtj8d IBkxVbEkP80eVTFCwcCTEJHUkks1KEmKQncQdcQkYRsrfGB7MR2tmFb0sWVX7Iz7+wVp WY+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533IG00hW9DKAOhHOqSzXqQr/mN/ltFd2rOECrqmlkoftVIA8qnw 3lXxeSEViNqj/bN2O6IMNVImOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy3pPHKGooWvkBRFtexkarhJ/F+iDgBDd2AvneuwKST6XV3pIPzRjeedBASMW5lbi9X+vSmfQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:1c20:b0:6f4:639e:9400 with SMTP id nc32-20020a1709071c2000b006f4639e9400mr25291474ejc.485.1652289878937; Wed, 11 May 2022 10:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2a02:1811:3a7e:7b00:1400:24ea:cbca:e681? (ptr-9fplejn4os7m3x31ny9.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be. [2a02:1811:3a7e:7b00:1400:24ea:cbca:e681]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q20-20020a170906941400b006f3ef214dd1sm1219117ejx.55.2022.05.11.10.24.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 11 May 2022 10:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <82370296-a5c0-fa25-1993-1c4a885af02c@mind.be> Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 19:24:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: Baruch Siach , Andrey Nechypurenko References: <20220329145904.63900-1-andreynech@gmail.com> <878rr88joi.fsf@tarshish> From: Arnout Vandecappelle Organization: Essensium/Mind In-Reply-To: <878rr88joi.fsf@tarshish> Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/cmake: bump version to 3.22.3 X-BeenThere: buildroot@buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Alsey Miller , Thomas Petazzoni , buildroot@buildroot.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" On 11/05/2022 12:06, Baruch Siach wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > On Wed, May 11 2022, Andrey Nechypurenko wrote: >>> On 10/05/2022 17:20, Andrey Nechypurenko wrote: >>>>>> I am just curious if the following patch will be accepted for the >>>>>> upcoming release? >>>>> >>>>> What about bumping it to 3.23.1? >>>> >>>> At the time I submitted the patch (29.03), v.3.22 was the latest one. It >>>> also fixes the bug I was facing. So it is good enough for me and definitely >>>> better than v.3.18 currently used by Buildroot. If you would like to submit >>>> another one for v. 3.23.1 it would be great. >>> >>> Up to now, we've always kept the cmake version in sync with the value of >>> BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN (defined in support/dependencies/check-host-cmake.mk and >>> updated every time there is a package that requires a specific newer version - >>> like swift would, as mentioned by Alsey. >> >> In addition to the Swift package mentioned by Alsey, there could be custom >> packages added by Buildroot users with external trees. This is what I am >> currently doing. >> >>> What is the bug you were facing? >> >> Our custom package uses a feature which was buggy: >> https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/18299 (it is also mentioned >> in the submitted patch). This bug was fixed in CMake 3.20. >> >>> Perhaps backporting its fix is appropriate? >> >> If the proposed patch with v.3.22 does not introduce any regression, then I >> personally do not see any reasons for backporting. 3.18 is two years old and >> it might be beneficial to switch to a newer one. > > Backporting the cmake fix alone would not help hosts with cmake version > 3.18 installed. With current BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN set to 3.18 Buildroot > will not build the fixed cmake host package, but rely instead on the > buggy host installed cmake. So we have 3 options: - Keep the current situation, which creates problems for some external packages. - Update cmake but not BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN, which is nice for keeping cmake up to date but doesn't solve anything for people who run into the bug and have CMake 3.18 or 3.19 installed. - Update both cmake and BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN, which basically means that everybody has to build host-cmake unless they have a really bleeding edge distro. There is a fourth, much more complicated option, which is to allow individual packages to define the minimal cmake version. Then a package that actually runs into the problem can force BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN. Of course we'd also need to change cmake.mk to use that config-dependendent cmake version. And we're in a bit of a tricky situation with the patch version - we'd prefer to set BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN to e.g. 3.22, not 3.22.3, so people who have 3.22.1 installed on the host don't need to build host-cmake. And there's a problem with cmake.hash that needs to contain the hashes of many different versions. So overall, nothing good :-( With all of the above, I'd say we bump to 3.22.3 (this patch) and set BR2_CMAKE_VERSION_MIN to 3.22. What do others think? Regards, Arnout _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot