On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 at 09:43, Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-08-08 at 08:38 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > > Drop handle-read-only-files.patch: read only files should > > be handled by making them writeable explicitly. See > > the upstream discussion: > > https://github.com/NixOS/patchelf/pull/89 > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <a...@linutronix.de> > > --- > > .../patchelf/handle-read-only-files.patch | 65 ------------------- > > ...{patchelf_0.14.5.bb => patchelf_0.15.0.bb} | 6 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-) > > delete mode 100644 > > meta/recipes-devtools/patchelf/patchelf/handle-read-only-files.patch > > rename meta/recipes-devtools/patchelf/{patchelf_0.14.5.bb => > > patchelf_0.15.0.bb} (79%) > > patchelf is used by uninative and you have no idea the world of pain > you're pushing onto others by dropping this one. It isn't as simple as > you think due to the places patchelf is used. I don't remember the > details, I do remember thinking along the lines of this patch and then > changing my mind though.
Usage of patchelf in uninative seems to be contained in uninative_changeinterp, which can be tweaked to handle r/o files before invoking patchelf. Was it that all usages of it need to be tweaked similarly? In upgrades like these I only see what the autobuilder and the commit history and the patch header say. I can restore and rebase the patch, but it would benefit from a better explanation. Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#169074): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/169074 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/92886974/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
