Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:39:23 -0500 From: Paul Schmehl <pauls@utdallas.edu> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portsnap and local patches Message-ID: <8BBEE1E1CE77CB9AC0DA92ED@utd59514.utdallas.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703132319320.1824@knuth.cs.hmc.edu> References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703132319320.1824@knuth.cs.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==========3A36778D1F2726EE1D7D==========
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
--On Tuesday, March 13, 2007 23:26:26 -0700 Nate Eldredge <nge@cs.hmc.edu>=20
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> portsnap is a very nice way to keep your ports tree in sync, but it has
> the disadvantage that it keeps your ports tree in sync :) If you make
> local changes (e.g. adding a patch) they get clobbered. Does anyone know
> of a convenient way to keep ports up to date while preserving local
> patches?
>
That's why God made shell scripting???
if [ -f ${port/path/mypatch} ]; then
cp $mypatch ${port/path/mypatch}
fi
Paul Schmehl (pauls@utdallas.edu)
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
--==========3A36778D1F2726EE1D7D==========--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8BBEE1E1CE77CB9AC0DA92ED>