proclus | 1 Mar 05:15 2010

radical mormons


Those of you who have been following mormonism on the web
for many years will probably recognize The Radical Mormon
publication.  This was likely the first attempt to make
a web portal for latter-day saint people, and this pioneering
effort helped to inspire many other sites to do likewise.  
Radical set itself apart as a place where devout and sincere
LDS and mormons could intelligently discuss controversial
doctrines in a positive light, at a time when the anti-mormon
forces were very powerful on the web.  The publication has been
active off and on ever since that time.  If you are not
familiar with it, you might want to have a look at it.  This
site broke new ground at the time that it was started in 1999.

http://proclus.tripod.com/radical/

For those who are already familiar with The Radical Mormon,
you might be interested to know that the editors and 
contributors have recently started work on some historical
information regarding the publication, which provides many
links to related websites.  You can have an advance look, 
and see as it evolves.  

http://proclus.tripod.com/radical/editor.html

Some of you may even like to contribute something; help us
fix broken links, contribute a news item, editorial, or
personal story.  If you were a part of the activity that
spawned The Radical Mormon, you might like to submit your
link for inclusion on our contributors page.
(Continue reading)

William Wagner | 1 Mar 16:04 2010

Re: X11R7.5 git branch

On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>
> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>
> Should I post patch series to the list?
> I am waiting for your comments on my work!

Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work, 
depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.

One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there 
that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as 
separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.

Peter - what do you suggest should be the process for getting this in, 
most of it looks good but there are a few places where I think things 
can be improved. Should Paulius and I try to get a master repository 
that we both sign off on?

Will

--

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Wagner                                     will_wagner@...
Development Manager                      Office Tel: +44 (0)20 7371 2032
Carallon Ltd, Studio G20, Shepherds Building, Rockley Rd, London W14 0DA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Continue reading)

bugzilla | 1 Mar 20:08 2010
Picon

[Bug 1213] New: Move .config into output directory

https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1213

           Summary: Move .config into output directory
           Product: buildroot
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P5
         Component: Other
        AssignedTo: unassigned@...
        ReportedBy: will_wagner@...
                CC: buildroot@...
   Estimated Hours: 0.0

Created an attachment (id=1177)
 --> (https://bugs.busybox.net/attachment.cgi?id=1177)
Move .config into output directory

Currently buildroot places most files generated by the build in the output
directory (which can be overriden with O=). However a number of files remain
within the buildroot tree.

These are:
.auto.deps (incidentally this no longer seems to be used)
.config
.config.cmd
.config.old
package/config/buildroot-config (which then gets copied into output/build) 
(Continue reading)

bugzilla | 1 Mar 19:57 2010
Picon

[Bug 1207] New: linux26-menuconfig does not apply all kernel patches

https://bugs.busybox.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1207

           Summary: linux26-menuconfig does not apply all kernel patches
           Product: buildroot
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P5
         Component: Other
        AssignedTo: unassigned@...
        ReportedBy: will_wagner@...
                CC: buildroot@...
   Estimated Hours: 0.0

Created an attachment (id=1171)
 --> (https://bugs.busybox.net/attachment.cgi?id=1171)
fix for linux26-menuconfig

If your target has board specific kernel patches and you do the following:

make linux26clean
make linux26-menuconfig

Then it will not apply your board patches before opening menuconfig. The
attached patch fixes the issue.

--

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.busybox.net/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
(Continue reading)

Darcy L. Watkins | 1 Mar 20:54 2010

Patch to allow iproute2 without IPv6 requirement

Hello,

I noticed that when I upgraded from 2009.02 to 2010.02 I lost iproute2
in my config that doesn't use IPv6.  The patch below applies to 2010.02
and should allow the iproute2 to build without IPv6.  It builds OK (and
doesn't appear to misbehave) on my powerpc 405 platform and I am also
building it to try out later today on an ARM11 platform.

Anyone else who wants to test drive it is welcome to do so.

------------

Signed-off-by: Darcy L. Watkins <dwatkins@...>

--- buildroot-2010.02_powerpc/package/iproute2/Config.in.theorig	2010-02-26
06:52:48.000000000 -0800
+++ buildroot-2010.02_powerpc/package/iproute2/Config.in	2010-03-01 11:01:09.000000000 -0800
 <at>  <at>  -1,11 +1,8  <at>  <at> 
 config BR2_PACKAGE_IPROUTE2
 	bool "iproute2"
-	depends on BR2_INET_IPV6
 	help
 	  Kernel routing and traffic control utilities.  Provides things
 	  like ip and tc.

 	  http://developer.osdl.org/dev/iproute2/

-comment "iproute2 requires a toolchain with IPv6 support"
-	depends on !BR2_INET_IPV6
--- buildroot-2010.02_powerpc/package/iproute2/iproute2.mk.theorig	2010-02-26
(Continue reading)

Paulius Zaleckas | 1 Mar 21:47 2010
Picon

Re: X11R7.5 git branch

On 03/01/2010 05:04 PM, William Wagner wrote:
> On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>
>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>
>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>> I am waiting for your comments on my work!
>
> Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work,
> depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.

Fonts are the most boring part ;)

> One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there
> that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as
> separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.

Which changes are not related?
I have pushed two branches there. Master contains all my patches, while
x11r75 branch has only X11 related changes. However there is some changes like
XCB, but its newer version is required by X11R7.5.
The other problem with my change series is that it will break git bisect...

> Peter - what do you suggest should be the process for getting this in,
> most of it looks good but there are a few places where I think things
> can be improved. Should Paulius and I try to get a master repository
> that we both sign off on?
(Continue reading)

Thomas Petazzoni | 2 Mar 09:43 2010

Re: X11R7.5 git branch

Hi Paulius,

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:35:34 +0200
Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@...> wrote:

> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
> 
> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
> 
> Should I post patch series to the list?

For me, having your git tree was enough.

Generally, it looks very good and I think it can be merged as is. I
appreciate the removal of all obsolete packages.

I have a few questions though :

 *) On many packages, but not all, you added FOOBAR_LIBTOOL_PATCH=NO.
    What has driven your choice of applying or not applying the libtool
    patch ?

 *) I imagine that all the patches you are dropping for the different
    packages have been merged upstream and are no longer needed ?

 *) I think the xf86-video-wsfb could just be removed. But this can be
    done later, if you don't want to rebase all your patch set.

 *) Concerning the dependency of xcb-util on gperf on the host, we have
    to decide whether gperf is a mandatory tool for Buildroot (in which
(Continue reading)

William Wagner | 2 Mar 10:02 2010

Re: X11R7.5 git branch

On 02/03/2010 08:43, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hi Paulius,
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:35:34 +0200
> Paulius Zaleckas<paulius.zaleckas@...>  wrote:
>
>    
>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>
>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>
>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>>      
> For me, having your git tree was enough.
>
> Generally, it looks very good and I think it can be merged as is. I
> appreciate the removal of all obsolete packages.
>
> I have a few questions though :
>
>   *) On many packages, but not all, you added FOOBAR_LIBTOOL_PATCH=NO.
>      What has driven your choice of applying or not applying the libtool
>      patch ?
>    

This is the same problem I saw and posted about here 
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2010-February/032446.html. 
It looks like the package has a newer version of ltmain.sh (2.2.6). Not 
sure if it no longer needs the patch of if that version needs a 
different version of the patch. I found most xorg packages needed the 
(Continue reading)

William Wagner | 2 Mar 10:08 2010

Re: X11R7.5 git branch


On 01/03/2010 20:47, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
> On 03/01/2010 05:04 PM, William Wagner wrote:
>> On 28/02/2010 18:35, Paulius Zaleckas wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As we have discussed earlier I have put all my X11R7.5 work in:
>>>
>>> git://gitorious.org/takeme-buildroot/takeme-buildroot.git x11r75
>>>
>>> Should I post patch series to the list?
>>> I am waiting for your comments on my work!
>>
>> Paulius, have started look at what you have done. Good work,
>> depressingly similar to all the work I have done, but oh well.
>
> Fonts are the most boring part ;)
>
>> One thing I have noticed is that you have quite a few changes in there
>> that are not related to x11, any chance of splitting those out as
>> separate patches as don't want them to complicate review.
>
> Which changes are not related?

I might be browsing gitorious wrong but it appears you have patches for 
devtmpfs, gdb and the autotools infrastructure in there.

As far as other changes I made a few more changes to xserver and a few 
other packages but it is perhaps easiest for me to submit patches once 
yours have hit the tree if people are prepared to do things like that.
(Continue reading)

Thomas Petazzoni | 2 Mar 10:15 2010

Re: X11R7.5 git branch

On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:08:18 +0000
William Wagner <will_wagner@...> wrote:

> I might be browsing gitorious wrong but it appears you have patches
> for devtmpfs, gdb and the autotools infrastructure in there.

It is likely a gitorious browsing problem, because I cloned the
git tree, and the x11r75 branch pointed by Paulius really only
contained changes to package/x11r7/.

Thomas
--

-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

Gmane