[v3,01/27] webkitgtk: 2.46.6 -> 2.48.0

From: Kai Kang <kai.kang@windriver.com>

Upgrade webkitgtk from 2.46.6 to 2.48.0:

* remove backported patch bmalloc-fix.patch
* update context of no-musttail-arm.patch
* add PACKAGECONFIG speech

Signed-off-by: Kai Kang <kai.kang@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
---
 .../webkit/webkitgtk/bmalloc-fix.patch        | 36 -------------------
 .../webkit/webkitgtk/no-musttail-arm.patch    | 14 +++++---
 ...ebkitgtk_2.46.6.bb => webkitgtk_2.48.0.bb} |  4 +--
 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 meta/recipes-sato/webkit/webkitgtk/bmalloc-fix.patch
 rename meta/recipes-sato/webkit/{webkitgtk_2.46.6.bb => webkitgtk_2.48.0.bb} (97%)

Hi Khem,

I appreciate this patch series is a work in progress and evolving but
it is creating a headache for those trying to help merge patches.

The problem is that we have bits of this series already going through
testing/review. We now have a v3 and no idea which bits of it have
changed. The logical thing for us to do is throw away what we've done
and start again. If you could give an idea of what has changed that
would help.

Cheers,

Richard

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 2:40 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Khem,
>
> I appreciate this patch series is a work in progress and evolving but
> it is creating a headache for those trying to help merge patches.
>
> The problem is that we have bits of this series already going through
> testing/review. We now have a v3 and no idea which bits of it have
> changed. The logical thing for us to do is throw away what we've done
> and start again. If you could give an idea of what has changed that
> would help.
>

Yeah, I was trying to hurry a bit and pulling many strings together,
sending patches upstream, addressing that feedback where needed and
also ensuring
test combinations are working, probably a cover letter would have been better

v2 - Address feedback from Mathieu and Alex except ncurses and man-db
patch, fix webkit to work with clang-20
v3 - man-db fix is enhanced to address root cause which is musl
specific and had to do more sadly, address ncurses issue

The good thing is the changes are done now. I do see some parts of
these changes are already merged so I will send the remaining in v4
after rebase.

> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>

On Wed, 2025-03-19 at 09:07 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 2:40 AM Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Khem,
> > 
> > I appreciate this patch series is a work in progress and evolving but
> > it is creating a headache for those trying to help merge patches.
> > 
> > The problem is that we have bits of this series already going through
> > testing/review. We now have a v3 and no idea which bits of it have
> > changed. The logical thing for us to do is throw away what we've done
> > and start again. If you could give an idea of what has changed that
> > would help.
> > 
> 
> Yeah, I was trying to hurry a bit and pulling many strings together,
> sending patches upstream, addressing that feedback where needed and
> also ensuring
> test combinations are working, probably a cover letter would have been better
> 
> v2 - Address feedback from Mathieu and Alex except ncurses and man-db
> patch, fix webkit to work with clang-20
> v3 - man-db fix is enhanced to address root cause which is musl
> specific and had to do more sadly, address ncurses issue
> 
> The good thing is the changes are done now. I do see some parts of
> these changes are already merged so I will send the remaining in v4
> after rebase.

Sounds good thanks. I did go through and tried to isolate the bits
which hadn't changed and had been tested.

I've upgraded dbus-glib, could you check and see if the new version
needs gcc 15 fixes or not please?

I also merged fixes for the libmatchbox and psplash recipes so my
patches should replace yours there.

Resending what is left is the best way forward once those are resolved.

Cheers,

Richard

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 9:11 AM Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2025-03-19 at 09:07 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 2:40 AM Richard Purdie
> > <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Khem,
> > >
> > > I appreciate this patch series is a work in progress and evolving but
> > > it is creating a headache for those trying to help merge patches.
> > >
> > > The problem is that we have bits of this series already going through
> > > testing/review. We now have a v3 and no idea which bits of it have
> > > changed. The logical thing for us to do is throw away what we've done
> > > and start again. If you could give an idea of what has changed that
> > > would help.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, I was trying to hurry a bit and pulling many strings together,
> > sending patches upstream, addressing that feedback where needed and
> > also ensuring
> > test combinations are working, probably a cover letter would have been better
> >
> > v2 - Address feedback from Mathieu and Alex except ncurses and man-db
> > patch, fix webkit to work with clang-20
> > v3 - man-db fix is enhanced to address root cause which is musl
> > specific and had to do more sadly, address ncurses issue
> >
> > The good thing is the changes are done now. I do see some parts of
> > these changes are already merged so I will send the remaining in v4
> > after rebase.
>
> Sounds good thanks. I did go through and tried to isolate the bits
> which hadn't changed and had been tested.
>
> I've upgraded dbus-glib, could you check and see if the new version
> needs gcc 15 fixes or not please?

yeah will factor that into v4

>
> I also merged fixes for the libmatchbox and psplash recipes so my
> patches should replace yours there.
>
I also see you have bluez5 fix in master-next as well, I will drop
that one too in v4

> Resending what is left is the best way forward once those are resolved.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>