On 9 January 2016 at 03:27, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> For patches which fix 'correctness' issues uncovered by musl maybe
> it's better to apply the patches unconditionally, so they get some
> test cover from non-musl builds?
>
> Especially true in this case - see below.
>
Agreed. Patches should onl
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Andre McCurdy wrote:
>>> +diff -Naur DirectFB-1.7.6.orig/lib/direct/os/linux/glibc/mutex.h
>>> DirectFB-1.7.6/lib/direct/os/linux/glibc/mutex.h
>>> +--- DirectFB-1.7.6.orig/lib/direct/os/linux/glibc/mutex.h 2
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Andre McCurdy wrote:
>> +diff -Naur DirectFB-1.7.6.orig/lib/direct/os/linux/glibc/mutex.h
>> DirectFB-1.7.6/lib/direct/os/linux/glibc/mutex.h
>> +--- DirectFB-1.7.6.orig/lib/direct/os/linux/glibc/mutex.h 2013-12-18
>> 19:16:24.0 -0500
>> DirectFB
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:18 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> compar_fn_t, sigval_t and non-posix recursive mutexes
> are not available in musl
>
> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj
> ---
> meta/recipes-graphics/directfb/directfb.inc| 5 ++
> .../directfb/directfb/compar_fn_t.patch| 62
> +++
compar_fn_t, sigval_t and non-posix recursive mutexes
are not available in musl
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj
---
meta/recipes-graphics/directfb/directfb.inc| 5 ++
.../directfb/directfb/compar_fn_t.patch| 62 ++
.../directfb/directfb/union-sigval.patch
