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

["Richard Purdie" <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, 2021-08-13 at 17:41 +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 14:46, Michael Opdenacker
> <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 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...
>
> In my experience git has been clever enough to notice that the base is
> different and will apply the patches anyway.

Sadly not, I just fix this stuff up locally and deal with it. If I were to
do anything more, I'll get told the 101 other ways we should be doing it 
and/or put people off sending patches and we really don't have the bandwidth 
to change right now.

Cheers,

Richard