Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 00:32:14 -0400 From: Matthew Pounsett <matt@conundrum.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Complicated patching Message-ID: <958AF7F7-AD80-4F01-8F1D-E9E262B953F6@conundrum.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi. In a (possibly foolish) attempt to add a third-party patch to an = application I use *without* abandoning the ports tree for this app, I'm = trying to make a local modification to the port to download and include = the patch in the build process. The problem I'm running into is that it = is distributed from a source distribution site that uses a downloads CGI = rather than a direct URL to distribution files, and the URI has nothing = whatsoever to do with the name of the resulting file. This, obviously, = breaks MASTER_SITES and DISTFILES because what I have to put in = DISTFILES doesn't match what would go in the distinfo file. I'm poking around at possible alternatives, but nothing really stands = out in the reading I've done. Is this sort of thing supported by the = ports system at all, or should I just abandon this completely and switch = to fully manual builds? I briefly looked at downloading the patch file, splitting it up (it = includes several patches) and including the resulting files in = files/patch-*. This would be worth the work, but I'm also toying with = eventually submitting my changes as a patch to the port with a line in = OPTIONS to include/ignore the 3rd party patches and I can't find a way = to wrap an ifdef around patch-* files in the Makefile, since they seem = to be auto-discovered and acted on. =20 If anyone has any advice on how to handle this in a way that solves both = problems, I'd appreciate it. Thanks in advance! Matt Pounsett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?958AF7F7-AD80-4F01-8F1D-E9E262B953F6>