From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:23:00 +0200 From: Michael Olbrich Message-ID: <20190909062300.w6jbjiywrl5oqrva@pengutronix.de> References: <20190822104241.21777-1-rhi@pengutronix.de> <2927514.lnS8Y61pnd@ada> <20190904130504.5cp7hzodc4u4egn6@pengutronix.de> <4933953.zd8LfGRCK0@ada> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4933953.zd8LfGRCK0@ada> Subject: Re: [ptxdist] [RFC 3/4] libptxdist: add a function to find unreferenced source directories List-Id: PTXdist Development Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: ptxdist@pengutronix.de Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ptxdist-bounces@pengutronix.de Sender: "ptxdist" To: Alexander Dahl , Ladislav Michl Cc: ptxdist@pengutronix.de On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 03:16:51PM +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 4. September 2019, 15:05:04 CEST schrieb Michael Olbrich: > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:01:58AM +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote: > > > FWIW, we are still using different versions of at91bootstrap in different > > > BSPs. The legacy version (at91bootstrap) has patches in the directory > > > 'patches/Bootstrap-v1.16' and the current version (at91bootstrap2) has > > > them in 'patches/at91bootstrap-3.8.13'. > > > > > > If one or the other package needs fixes, let me know. > > > > PTXdist upstream has patches for 'at91bootstrap'. Do you use those, or do > > you have your own patch stack in your BSP? > > > > I'd like to remove the patches from PTXdist. It's the only packages that > > has a configurable version and patches for one specific version upstream. > > We have our own patches anyway. > > And even if not, it would also be no problem to add them to our BSP, if > ptxdist won't ship those anymore. Hmm, so I noticed that I actually run build tests for this. And I'd probably loose those if I drop the patches... So another Idea: From what I understand, Upstream for this is dead, so there will be no new version, right? Can I assume, that nowadays only version 1.16 is used? In that case I could just remove the version options and keep the patches. That way all my scripts are happy and it's still covered in my build tests. Alex, would that make sense to you? Ladis, you submitted the last patch for this. Is this still relevant for you? What do you think? 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