From owner-freebsd-ports  Sun Jan 18 18:18:27 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA11018
          for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 18:18:27 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (root@spinner.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA10112;
          Sun, 18 Jan 1998 18:06:34 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au)
Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spinner.netplex.com.au (8.8.8/8.8.8/Spinner) with ESMTP id KAA23505;
	Mon, 19 Jan 1998 10:05:03 +0800 (WST)
	(envelope-from peter@spinner.netplex.com.au)
Message-Id: <199801190205.KAA23505@spinner.netplex.com.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
cc: ache@nagual.pp.ru, peter@netplex.com.au, perhaps@yes.no,
        gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: amanda port, empty PATCH_STRIP= lines causes trouble 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 18 Jan 1998 14:37:01 PST."
             <199801182237.OAA07740@baloon.mimi.com> 
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 10:05:02 +0800
From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Satoshi Asami wrote:
>  * It seems that you mix several problems in one.  I repeat (already many
>  * times) that both new and old patch handle Index:  equally. It was bug in
>  * CVS diff affects _both_ new and old patch which was masked by "fixing" old
>  * patch localy in FreeBSD which cause bugs with world-wide patches. Now old
>  * patch is "unfixed" back and CVS is fixed instead. It means that old and
>  * new patch handle Indexes equally (repeat one more). I wonder if anybody
>  * really read what I write?
> 
> Sorry, I did read that part but didn't understand what you meant.  If
> that is the case, that change should be backed out too, at least until 
> there is a release with a new cvs comes out.  Or we are going to have
> a hard time working with user-submitted diffs (you know how the ports
> team get most of the stuff?).

I agree with Satoshi.  My preference would be to convert the new patch to 
a port, revert to the old patch in the tree (with it's "unique" handling 
of Index:), and leave the change to cvs in place.  Once we've had a -stable
release with a cvs that generates full paths in the diff headers and 
people have had a chance to upgrade/make world/etc, then we can revisit 
replacing the patch in the base tree.

>  * 			   _Before_ importing of new patch I ask everybody
>  * about this problems and nobody seems to react which confirm that nobody
>  * read what I write. I don't plan to waste time for importing and then
>  * backing out. You should answer something before I plan to import.
> 
> Sorry I didn't respond to it, but I was very busy last week because I
> was preparing for a talk.  There were too many messages between you
> and Jeorg arguing about what's right and what's wrong I kinda skimmed
> over it after awhile, and wasn't aware you were planning to import a
> new version of "patch".

We went through all this a few months ago with a previous version (patch
2.4 I think it was) but decided not to complete the import of the new src/
contrib/patch since there were unresolved problems.  These problems still
have not been fixed.

Cheers,
-Peter