Mailing List Archive

I may not be understanding what you are askgin but you can build a kernel
without the bootsplash patch and have just the framebuffer. In Menuconfig
simply uncheck the bootsplash stuff.


On Sun, 3 Oct 2004, Jerry McBride wrote:

>
> I've just rediscovered gentoo-dev-sources and I find I'd like to eliminate a
> patch out of the gentoo-dev-sources-2.6.8-r6 ebuild.
>
>
> How does one go about deleting a patch? More specificly the boot splash
> patches? I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this patch
> eliminates that possibility.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thank you, in advance.
>
> Jerry
>
>
> --
>
> ******************************************************************************
> Registered Linux User Number 185956
> FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
> Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
> Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
> 8:21pm up 33 days, 20:34, 7 users, load average: 2.03, 2.03, 2.12
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>

--
Brett I. Holcomb

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Sun, 3 Oct 2004, Jerry McBride wrote:

>
> I've just rediscovered gentoo-dev-sources and I find I'd like to eliminate a
> patch out of the gentoo-dev-sources-2.6.8-r6 ebuild.
>
>
> How does one go about deleting a patch? More specificly the boot splash
> patches? I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this patch
> eliminates that possibility.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thank you, in advance.
>
> Jerry
>
Jerry,
If you have access to the patch you want to remove then a command
of the following form should work:

bzcat patch | patch -p1 -R

(or so I'm told... ;-)

- Mark

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Sunday 03 October 2004 10:25 pm, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> I may not be understanding what you are askgin but you can build a kernel
> without the bootsplash patch and have just the framebuffer. In Menuconfig
> simply uncheck the bootsplash stuff.
>
> On Sun, 3 Oct 2004, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > I've just rediscovered gentoo-dev-sources and I find I'd like to
> > eliminate a patch out of the gentoo-dev-sources-2.6.8-r6 ebuild.
> >
> >
> > How does one go about deleting a patch? More specificly the boot splash
> > patches? I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this
> > patch eliminates that possibility.
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thank you, in advance.
> >
> > Jerry
> >

Hi Brett,

Disabling the bootsplash option does not restore the original frame buffer
operations. It would seem that the boot splash enhancements are changing the
framebuffer functionality in a way that it's almost broken for what I need to
do.

What I;d like to do is top the bootsplash and the framebuffer-tng patches from
being applied so I can keep fb support at the vanilla level....

The question is, How?

Cheers.

--

******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
11:33pm up 33 days, 23:46, 7 users, load average: 2.57, 2.88, 2.90

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Sunday 03 October 2004 11:09 pm, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Oct 2004, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > I've just rediscovered gentoo-dev-sources and I find I'd like to
> > eliminate a patch out of the gentoo-dev-sources-2.6.8-r6 ebuild.
> >
> >
> > How does one go about deleting a patch? More specificly the boot splash
> > patches? I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this
> > patch eliminates that possibility.
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated.
> >
> > Thank you, in advance.
> >
> > Jerry
>
> Jerry,
> If you have access to the patch you want to remove then a command
> of the following form should work:
>
> bzcat patch | patch -p1 -R
>
> (or so I'm told... ;-)
>


Thanks, I'll give it a whack.

--

******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
11:38pm up 33 days, 23:51, 7 users, load average: 2.55, 2.51, 2.71

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Jerry McBride wrote:
> I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this
> patch eliminates that possibility.

Why are you using a heavily patched kernel if you need unpatched code?


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 4:41 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
<snip>
> What I;d like to do is top the bootsplash and the framebuffer-tng
> patches from being applied so I can keep fb support at the vanilla
> level....
>
> The question is, How?
>
> Cheers.

one posibility is to use the non-gentoo development-sources from
portage and apply your own patches as required?
--

Linux - It is now safe to turn on your computer.

-- From a Slashdot.org post


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

I see now. You could modify the ebuild to not apply the patch - maybe??

>
> From: Jerry McBride <mcbrides9@comcast.net>
> Date: 2004/10/04 Mon AM 03:41:23 GMT
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Removing patches...
>
> On Sunday 03 October 2004 10:25 pm, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> > I may not be understanding what you are askgin but you can build a kernel
> > without the bootsplash patch and have just the framebuffer. In Menuconfig
> > simply uncheck the bootsplash stuff.
> >
> > On Sun, 3 Oct 2004, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > > I've just rediscovered gentoo-dev-sources and I find I'd like to
Snipped
> Hi Brett,
>
> Disabling the bootsplash option does not restore the original frame buffer
> operations. It would seem that the boot splash enhancements are changing the
> framebuffer functionality in a way that it's almost broken for what I need to
> do.
>
> What I;d like to do is top the bootsplash and the framebuffer-tng patches from
> being applied so I can keep fb support at the vanilla level....
>
> The question is, How?
>
> Cheers.
>
> --
>
> ******************************************************************************
> Registered Linux User Number 185956
> FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
> Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
> Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
> 11:33pm up 33 days, 23:46, 7 users, load average: 2.57, 2.88, 2.90
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jerry McBride wrote:
| I've just rediscovered gentoo-dev-sources and I find I'd like to eliminate a
| patch out of the gentoo-dev-sources-2.6.8-r6 ebuild.
|
|
| How does one go about deleting a patch? More specificly the boot splash
| patches? I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this patch
| eliminates that possibility.
|
| Any help would be appreciated.
|
| Thank you, in advance.
|
| Jerry
|
|

~From the kernel-2.eclass (which gentoo-dev-sources inherits):

# UNIPATCH_EXCLUDE - an addition var to support exlusion based completely
on "<passedstring>*" and not "<passedno#>_*"
# - this should _NOT_ be used from the ebuild as this is
reserved for end users passing excludes from the cli

Judging by this, I'd imagine you'd be able to do something like:

UNIPATCH_EXCLUDE="name_of_patch" emerge gentoo-dev-sources

I haven't tried this myself, so I cannot say if it works.

Going even further into the eclass shows that the patch just gets deleted
before patching the kernel source:

UNIPATCH_DROP="${UNIPATCH_EXCLUDE} ${UNIPATCH_DROP}"
~ for i in ${UNIPATCH_DROP}
~ do
~ for x in ${KPATCH_DIR}
~ do
~ rm -f ${x}/${i}* 2>/dev/null
~ if [ $? == 0 ]
~ then
~ einfo "Excluding Patch #${i}"
~ einfo "From: ${x/${WORKDIR}/}"
~ fi
~ done
~ done

Cheers
- --
When nothing can possibly go wrong, it will.

Aaron Walker - Gentoo Developer [ Gentoo/BSD / forensics herd ]
ka0ttic@gentoo.org http://dev.gentoo.org/~ka0ttic/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBYUg6C3poscuANHARAiS9AKChPYiZik7bvOVsd584saaIE0vDfQCglwEt
6LrW3BIoY02GHG/kwA6Shqg=
=G0/y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Sunday 03 October 2004 11:50 pm, Norberto Bensa wrote:
> Jerry McBride wrote:
> > I'd need to keep the vanilla framebuffer code intact and this
> > patch eliminates that possibility.
>
> Why are you using a heavily patched kernel if you need unpatched code?
>

I only need the frame buffer code vanilla. As for the other patches, they are
quite welcomed, especially the fix for cdwriters...


--

******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
5:52pm up 34 days, 18:05, 7 users, load average: 2.93, 2.99, 2.98

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

On Monday 04 October 2004 07:49 am, brettholcomb@charter.net wrote:
> I see now. You could modify the ebuild to not apply the patch - maybe??
>

You know... this situation begs for s real fix. It'd be better if you could
edit the ebuild and remark out the patches you don't want or need. Kind of a
more granular control of just what patches are applied to a development
kernel....

--

******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
5:54pm up 34 days, 18:07, 7 users, load average: 3.11, 3.03, 3.00

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

I guess that's what I was getting at. Move the ebuild to your local
portage directory, edit it to skip that patch and merge it.

On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Jerry McBride wrote:

> On Monday 04 October 2004 07:49 am, brettholcomb@charter.net wrote:
>> I see now. You could modify the ebuild to not apply the patch - maybe??
>>
>
> You know... this situation begs for s real fix. It'd be better if you could
> edit the ebuild and remark out the patches you don't want or need. Kind of a
> more granular control of just what patches are applied to a development
> kernel....
>
> --
>
> ******************************************************************************
> Registered Linux User Number 185956
> FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
> Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
> Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
> 5:54pm up 34 days, 18:07, 7 users, load average: 3.11, 3.03, 3.00
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>

--
Brett I. Holcomb

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
| I guess that's what I was getting at. Move the ebuild to your local
| portage directory, edit it to skip that patch and merge it.
|

Why? Did no one see my previous response to this?


- --
A bird in the bush usually has a friend in there with him.

Aaron Walker - Gentoo Developer [ Gentoo/BSD / forensics herd ]
ka0ttic@gentoo.org http://dev.gentoo.org/~ka0ttic/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBYmX5C3poscuANHARAtcKAJ9V0NjRdtvOVNIK416xRNFOUf0U0ACeMo/I
kCxFKwloUlF++vCRdQTSzWE=
=/ieq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list