Re: [bitbake-devel] [PATCH v3 4/4] fetch2/wget: fetch securely by default

["Peter Kjellerstedt" <peter.kjellerstedt@axis.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org <bitbake-
> devel@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of Michael Opdenacker
> Sent: den 11 augusti 2021 15:46
> To: Ross Burton <ross@burtonini.com>; bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> Subject: Re: [bitbake-devel] [PATCH v3 4/4] fetch2/wget: fetch securely by
> default
> 
> Hi Ross,
> 
> Thanks for the patches!
> 
> On 8/10/21 6:55 PM, Ross Burton wrote:
> > From: Ross Burton <ross@burtonini.com>
> >
> > The days of broken certificates are behind us now, so instead of always
> > passing --no-check-certificate to wget, don't pass it by default and
> > instead only pass it BB_CHECK_SSL_CERTS = "0".
> >
> > [ YOCTO #14108 ]
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <ross.burton@arm.com>
> > ---
> >  .../bitbake-user-manual-fetching.rst          |  4 ++++
> >  .../bitbake-user-manual-ref-variables.rst     |  4 ++++
> >  bitbake/lib/bb/fetch2/wget.py                 | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
> >  3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/bitbake/doc/bitbake-user-manual/bitbake-user-manual-
> fetching.rst b/bitbake/doc/bitbake-user-manual/bitbake-user-manual-
> fetching.rst
> 
> This patch looks good, but your patches seem to apply to the Poky repo,
> not BitBake. Wouldn't be easier for Richard if you submitted patches for
> the BitBake repo instead? That's where the patches need to go, if I
> understood correctly. Unless there's a workflow I'm not familiar with...
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael.

For those of us that actually use Poky, it is a lot easier to generate patches 
vs Poky, than the underlying repositories (as they are not available). This is 
normally not a problem, and RP handles it. The only caveat is to remember to 
split the patches and send them to different mail addresses when a bigger change 
requires changes to both OE-Core and Bitbake.

//Peter