Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:36:06 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Curtis Jewell <swordsman@csjewell.fastmail.us> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Versions distributed only as diffs? Message-ID: <20061030223606.GA40203@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20061028131728.C88671@lap.curtisjewell.boldlygoingnowhere.org> References: <20061028041144.GE69913@it.ca> <20061028131728.C88671@lap.curtisjewell.boldlygoingnowhere.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Oct 28), Curtis Jewell said: > On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Paul Chvostek wrote: > >I'm looking at porting a debian package whose source appears to be > >distributed as an older version plus a couple of diffs to bring the > >old source to the current stable version. > > > >The two diffs, uncompressed, are about 101KB. > > > >Should I add slightly-modified versions of these diffs as patches in > >the port's files directory, making a 104KB port? That seems awfully > >heavy. Or should I make distfiles of the original diffs, and write > >some Makefile magic in post-patch to apply them to the older source > >distfile? Is there a precedent for this? > > editors/vim does the second with about 90 small patches. So yes, there's > precedent. Why not just treat them as plain old patches and list them in PATCHFILES? misc/mmv and net/sniffit do this (with a single patch, but the same idea applies). -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061030223606.GA40203>