[Buildroot] [PATCH v1] busybox: Fix rtcwake to use /dev/rtc0 properly
Andy Shevchenko
andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com
Mon Nov 27 11:20:00 UTC 2017
On Sat, 2017-11-25 at 18:40 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> Sorry, I should have started my mail with:
>
> Thank you very much for your contributation. I'm afraid, however, we
> will not
> accept it as is in Buildroot.
Much better :-)
> > > In Buildroot, we don't accept "feature patches" for packages.
> >
> > To be honest it's not a feature patch at all. It fixes (okay,
> > workarounds) obvious bug in rtcwake logic. Easy to reproduce. 100%
> > reproducible
>
> Yes, that's why I continued with:
>
> > > We try to limit
> > > to patches that fix the build or complete breakage, sometimes also
> > > to
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> For other bugs, we will happily include upstream patches. But patches
> that are
> not yet upstream are dangerous: how can we be sure that it doesn't
> break things?
> In this particular case, you patch *will* actually break things for a
> who does
> have a working /dev/rtc but it is something different than /dev/rtc0.
> We want
> upstream to take the responsibility for that.
Of course.
Btw, how many use cases where people use rtcwake from busybox vs. util-
linux?
I doubt there are many.
> > > For sure, you should first send the patch upstream.
> >
> > Are you sure I didn't?
>
> I checked the mailing list, it wasn't there. I checked google, and
> found nothing.
>
> > The policy of Busybox mailing list is to reject (I'm not subscriber
> > and
>
> Buildroot mailing list has the same policy (well, it goes into a
> moderation
> queue but that is filled up with so much spam that it's unlikely it
> ever makes
> it to the list).
Exactly! Not reject, but put in to moderation queue. Feel the
difference!
> If you have a solution to bar spam from mailing lists, please
> share it!
See above.
> > after a such policy would not like to be one). Happy contribution!
> >
> > > Particularly in the case of
> > > busybox, Denys often proposes improved patches. If it gets
> > > accepted
> > > upstream,
> > > then we can consider including it in Buildroot as well.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > I'm done with it. If Denys is caring about project he will take the
> > series (there are more patches than just one) from his private
> > mailbox
> > (Cc was there as well).
>
> If/when he does, feel free to resubmit with a reference to the
> upstream commit.
OK.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
More information about the buildroot
mailing list