On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:23:39AM +0200, Andrea Adami wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Koen Kooi <k...@dominion.thruhere.net> > wrote: > > Op 10-04-18 om 23:01 schreef Andrea Adami: > >> Silence warnings about ingnored context. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Andrea Adami <andrea.ad...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> --- a/recipes-bsp/zaurusd/zaurusd/0001-zaurusd-add-support-for-collie.patch > >> +++ b/recipes-bsp/zaurusd/zaurusd/0001-zaurusd-add-support-for-collie.patch > >> @@ -1,17 +1,17 @@ > >> -From 85b94bed1feab70bc529a59fb80c26da825b9abe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >> +From 668a7bc50ca8f36df5a0eae73a5fa251aada9cc4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >> From: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbarysh...@gmail.com> > >> Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 16:00:10 +0400 > >> Subject: [PATCH] zaurusd: add support for collie > >> -Upstream-Status: Pending > > Was that change intended? > > No, not really. > Let say I have spotted it and planned to read the devtool code... > > I think it is tolerable in this context, because unfortunately not all > patches have Upstream-Status. > (I am wondering if there is still Upstream for zaurusd...) > > So I have left the result unchanged., planning to update the > Upstream-Status soon.
Related, but not exactly the same: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12674 Basically, in your case Upstream-status was above the empty line that separates patch header and patch description. Upstream-status should be in the patch description or it will be lost by devtool... -- Denys -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel