[ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[jon]

From: Jon Ringle <jringle@gridpoint.com>

Signed-off-by: Jon Ringle <jringle@gridpoint.com>
---
 rules/libelf.make | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/rules/libelf.make b/rules/libelf.make
index 4846563..74177c6 100644
--- a/rules/libelf.make
+++ b/rules/libelf.make
@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ PACKAGES-$(PTXCONF_LIBELF) += libelf
 #
 # Paths and names
 #
-LIBELF_VERSION	:= 0.170
-LIBELF_MD5	:= 03599aee98c9b726c7a732a2dd0245d5
+LIBELF_VERSION	:= 0.171
+LIBELF_MD5	:= 3926422984f02a2e5f7242d22ab6e1fa
 LIBELF		:= elfutils-$(LIBELF_VERSION)
 LIBELF_SUFFIX	:= tar.bz2
 LIBELF_URL	:= https://sourceware.org/elfutils/ftp/$(LIBELF_VERSION)/$(LIBELF).$(LIBELF_SUFFIX)
-- 
1.9.1


_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Alexander Dahl]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 530 bytes --]

Hello Jon,

On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 01:18:06PM -0400, jon@ringle.org wrote:
>  rules/libelf.make | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

There's a patch in patches/elfutils-0.170 you didn't cover. ;-)

Greets
Alex

-- 
/"\ ASCII RIBBON | »With the first link, the chain is forged. The first
\ / CAMPAIGN     | speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the
 X  AGAINST      | first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.«
/ \ HTML MAIL    | (Jean-Luc Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie)

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 91 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Jon Ringle]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 431 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Alexander Dahl <post@lespocky.de> wrote:

> Hello Jon,
>
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 01:18:06PM -0400, jon@ringle.org wrote:
> >  rules/libelf.make | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> There's a patch in patches/elfutils-0.170 you didn't cover. ;-)
>

Hi Alex.
The bump to 0.171 fixed the errors I was getting when building 0.170, so I
think the patch is not needed

-Jon

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 892 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 91 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Alexander Dahl]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 720 bytes --]

Hei hei,

On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:20:37PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
> The bump to 0.171 fixed the errors I was getting when building 0.170, so I
> think the patch is not needed

I already saw your v2 also removing the patch.

The reason Clemens introduced the patch was compilation failed with
GCC >= 8. Did you test that? (I can't, don't have a bleeding edge
system at hand.) Maybe Clemens can elaborate?

Greets
Alex

-- 
/"\ ASCII RIBBON | »With the first link, the chain is forged. The first
\ / CAMPAIGN     | speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the
 X  AGAINST      | first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.«
/ \ HTML MAIL    | (Jean-Luc Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie)

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 91 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Jon Ringle]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 649 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Dahl <post@lespocky.de> wrote:

> Hei hei,
>
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:20:37PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
> > The bump to 0.171 fixed the errors I was getting when building 0.170, so
> I
> > think the patch is not needed
>
> I already saw your v2 also removing the patch.
>
> The reason Clemens introduced the patch was compilation failed with
> GCC >= 8. Did you test that? (I can't, don't have a bleeding edge
> system at hand.) Maybe Clemens can elaborate?
>
>
I was getting errors when building 0.170 with gcc-7.3.1 and the errors went
away when I bumped to 0.171. I don't have gcc-8 to test with
-Jon

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1117 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 91 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Jon Ringle]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 834 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Jon Ringle <jon@ringle.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Dahl <post@lespocky.de> wrote:
>
>> Hei hei,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:20:37PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
>> > The bump to 0.171 fixed the errors I was getting when building 0.170,
>> so I
>> > think the patch is not needed
>>
>> I already saw your v2 also removing the patch.
>>
>> The reason Clemens introduced the patch was compilation failed with
>> GCC >= 8. Did you test that? (I can't, don't have a bleeding edge
>> system at hand.) Maybe Clemens can elaborate?
>>
>>
> I was getting errors when building 0.170 with gcc-7.3.1 and the errors
> went away when I bumped to 0.171. I don't have gcc-8 to test with
>
> The 0.171 was only just released in June 1st, so maybe Clemens can test
building with 0.171?

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1680 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 91 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Michael Olbrich]

On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 03:36:25PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Jon Ringle <jon@ringle.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Dahl <post@lespocky.de> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:20:37PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
> >> > The bump to 0.171 fixed the errors I was getting when building 0.170,
> >> so I
> >> > think the patch is not needed
> >>
> >> I already saw your v2 also removing the patch.
> >>
> >> The reason Clemens introduced the patch was compilation failed with
> >> GCC >= 8. Did you test that? (I can't, don't have a bleeding edge
> >> system at hand.) Maybe Clemens can elaborate?
> >>
> >>
> > I was getting errors when building 0.170 with gcc-7.3.1 and the errors
> > went away when I bumped to 0.171. I don't have gcc-8 to test with
> >
> > The 0.171 was only just released in June 1st, so maybe Clemens can test
> building with 0.171?

I've built host-libelf with gcc 8.1. 0.170 needs the patch and 0.171 builds
without the patch. Just removing the Patch is ok.

Michael


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de

Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] libelf: version bump 0.170 -> 0.171

[Clemens Gruber]

On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 08:31:36AM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 03:36:25PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Jon Ringle <jon@ringle.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Dahl <post@lespocky.de> wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:20:37PM -0400, Jon Ringle wrote:
> > >> > The bump to 0.171 fixed the errors I was getting when building 0.170,
> > >> so I
> > >> > think the patch is not needed
> > >>
> > >> I already saw your v2 also removing the patch.
> > >>
> > >> The reason Clemens introduced the patch was compilation failed with
> > >> GCC >= 8. Did you test that? (I can't, don't have a bleeding edge
> > >> system at hand.) Maybe Clemens can elaborate?
> > >>
> > >>
> > > I was getting errors when building 0.170 with gcc-7.3.1 and the errors
> > > went away when I bumped to 0.171. I don't have gcc-8 to test with
> > >
> > > The 0.171 was only just released in June 1st, so maybe Clemens can test
> > building with 0.171?
> 
> I've built host-libelf with gcc 8.1. 0.170 needs the patch and 0.171 builds
> without the patch. Just removing the Patch is ok.

Same here, libelf build succeeded without the patch.

Clemens

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de