[yocto] [meta-security][PATCH 3/3] sleuthkit: update to 4.1.3

cleanup QA issues with perl refresh patch Signed-off-by: Armin Kuster --- .../{afflib_3.6.6.bb => afflib_3.7.16.bb} | 20 +-- .../afflib/files/configure_rm_ms_flags.patch | 8 ++--- .../sleuth/files/fix_host_poison.patch| 33 --- ...{sleuthkit_4.1.3.bb =>

[yocto] [meta-security][PATCH 2/3] suricata: update 4.0.5

Fix rules make. Don't allow the makefile to download the rules. Use fetcher add install configs and remove manual intall of those files Signed-off-by: Armin Kuster --- .../{suricata_4.0.0.bb => suricata_4.0.5.bb} | 24 --- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

[yocto] [meta-security][PATCH 1/3] libhtp: update to 0.5.27

Signed-off-by: Armin Kuster --- .../suricata/{libhtp_0.5.25.bb => libhtp_0.5.27.bb} | 0 recipes-security/suricata/suricata.inc | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) rename recipes-security/suricata/{libhtp_0.5.25.bb => libhtp_0.5.27.bb}

Re: [yocto] Yocto userbase in numbers?

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 2:42 PM, akuster808 wrote: > On 08/09/2018 10:19 AM, Frazer, Will wrote: > > I was asked recently what a ballpark figure for the number of systems > running distributions built with yocto might be and I could not find > anything. > > I realise it’s almost impossible to tell

Re: [yocto] Yocto userbase in numbers?

On 08/09/2018 10:19 AM, Frazer, Will wrote: > > I was asked recently what a ballpark figure for the number of systems > running distributions built with yocto might be and I could not find > anything. > >   > > I realise it’s almost impossible to tell since technically everyone > builds a

Re: [yocto] Yocto userbase in numbers?

On Thu, 2018-08-09 at 17:19 +, Frazer, Will wrote: > I was asked recently what a ballpark figure for the number of systems > running distributions built with yocto might be and I could not find > anything. > > I realise it’s almost impossible to tell since technically everyone > builds a

Re: [yocto] uBoot, kernel and device tree files

Hi Srini, On 8.8.2018 20:51, Srinivasan, Raja wrote: All We are using rocko.on variscite var-som-mx6. In order to increase the security of our system (during a system upgrade), we are looking to merge uImage (kernel image) and the device tree file into 1 file. Currently these are 2

[yocto] rpmdeps buffer overflow

Hi, I'm creating a recipe for a precompiled SDK. This SDK contains various precompiled libraries and executables. When I get to the packaging step bitbake aborts with the following error: ERROR: pylon-5.0.12-r0 do_package: Error executing a python function in exec_python_func() autogenerated:

[yocto] Yocto userbase in numbers?

I was asked recently what a ballpark figure for the number of systems running distributions built with yocto might be and I could not find anything. I realise it's almost impossible to tell since technically everyone builds a different distro, but I don't suppose anyone has come across any

Re: [yocto] uBoot, kernel and device tree files

On 08/08/2018 11:51 AM, Srinivasan, Raja wrote: > All > > We are using rocko.on variscite var-som-mx6. > > In order to increase the security of our system (during a system upgrade), we > are looking to merge uImage (kernel image) and the device tree file into 1 > file. Currently these are 2

[yocto] Minutes: Yocto Project Weekly Triage Meeting

Attendees: Armin, Stephen, Randy, Richard, Joshua, Tim Wiki: https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Bug_Triage We discuss YP 2.6 M2 QA results and agreed to move toward release. AR: Paul – Review and update 12102 AR: Randy – Add comment to

[yocto] custom splash screen using psplash

Hallo, I would like to overwrite the poky psplash splash screen [1] with my custom splash screen. I copied the psplash_git.bb recipe from openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/psplash/ to my custom layer and changed psplash_poky_img.h to mycustom_image_img.h in mycustom_recipe/files/ But

[yocto] Device Tree Source is not correctly specified in fitImage signing process

Hi All, I am trying to generate a signed fitImage for IMX6 (nitrogen6x) som  using PYRO 2.3 branch.  I my setup I had the following configs:  KERNEL_DEVICETREE = "imx6q-sabrelite.dtb \                        imx6q-nitrogen6x.dtb imx6dl-nitrogen6x.dtb \"    KERNEL_IMAGETYPE =

Re: [yocto] HELP!

On 2018-08-09 14:39, Dhanush K.S wrote: Hello, I am currently trying to migrate from Yocto 1.8 Poky Fido 13.0.0 to Yocto 2.5. After cloning the Poky repository, I was confused with which tag to checkout with. With a fresh release like Sumo, it is better to stay at the HEAD of the sumo

Re: [yocto] uBoot, kernel and device tree files

Mathieu Appreciate the suggestion. Will give it a shot. Thanks, srini -Original Message- From: Mathieu Alexandre-Tétreault [mailto:alexandr...@amotus.ca] Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2018 8:45 AM To: Srinivasan, Raja ; yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: RE: uBoot, kernel and device tree files

Re: [yocto] uBoot, kernel and device tree files

Appreciate the suggestions. I will try them out. thanks, srini -Original Message- From: Michal Vokáč [mailto:michal.vo...@ysoft.com] Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2018 4:41 AM To: Srinivasan, Raja Cc: yocto@yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [yocto] uBoot, kernel and device tree files Hi Srini,

Re: [yocto] HELP!

You don't need to check out a specific tag. Just switch to the latest commit in the branch you want (e.g. sumo). Alex 2018-08-09 14:39 GMT+02:00 Dhanush K.S : > Hello, > > I am currently trying to migrate from Yocto 1.8 Poky Fido 13.0.0 to Yocto > 2.5. > > After cloning the Poky repository, I

[yocto] HELP!

Hello, I am currently trying to migrate from Yocto 1.8 Poky Fido 13.0.0 to Yocto 2.5. After cloning the Poky repository, I was confused with which tag to checkout with. Could you please help me understand the difference between the tags *"sumo-19.0.0" *and *"yocto-2.5"* As far as I understand,

Re: [yocto] QA cycle report for 2.6 M2 RC1

Hi Richard, There are 23 tests were not executed. 13 of these tests were related to SDK automated tests (part of it belong to galculator test). 6 of these tests (selftest/cases/distrodata.py), where it was configured to be skipped by Autobuilder (we will removed these tests from planned tests

Re: [yocto] QA cycle report for 2.6 M2 RC1

On Thu, 2018-08-09 at 05:57 +, Yeoh, Ee Peng wrote: > === Summary > > All planned tests were executed except a few SDK automated tests were > skipped in Autobuilder (testrun# 9830-9836, 9796-9797). Team found > that these SDK automated tests were running successfully in core- >