From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 24 00:20:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A1016A4E5; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:20:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pauls@utdallas.edu) Received: from smtp1.utdallas.edu (smtp1.utdallas.edu [129.110.10.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84B9144301; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:57:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pauls@utdallas.edu) Received: from utd59514.utdallas.edu (utd59514.utdallas.edu [129.110.3.28]) by smtp1.utdallas.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19E35388ED0; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:57:36 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:57:36 -0600 From: Paul Schmehl To: Doug Barton Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <43D56985.8060907@FreeBSD.org> References: <43D560BE.5040707@FreeBSD.org> <1412F25E9E8FD0831426A6E0@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <43D56985.8060907@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: Patching problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 00:20:51 -0000 --On Monday, January 23, 2006 15:40:53 -0800 Doug Barton wrote: > Paul Schmehl wrote: >> --On Monday, January 23, 2006 15:03:26 -0800 Doug Barton >> wrote: >> >>> Paul Schmehl wrote: >>>> I'm working on a slave port that applies some patches that are not >>>> needed in the master port. >>>> >>>> Three of the files being patched are op_sguil.c, op_sguil.h and >>>> op_plugbase.c. Those files exists in WRKDIR/src/output-plugins when >>>> the tarball is extracted. How should I name these patches so that >>>> they will be applied? >>> >>> Take a look at EXTRA_PATCHES In the porter's handbook. I used this >>> method to include a patch from the windowmaker distribution in that >>> port. >>> >> EXTRA_PATCHES is for *fetching* patches from more than one location. > > No, actually it isn't. I gave you a pointer to the documentation, AND an > example, both of which you obviously ignored. You could also try taking a > look at bsd.port.mk if you're still confused. > I read the documentation. I obviously didn't understand it. So now I'm totally confused. :-( Here's part of the problem. Along with the op_* patches, I *also* need to patch configure.in. In the master port, there is a patch for configure.in. The Handbook says you should patch the same file twice. So, won't EXTRA_PATCHES simply *add* the patches to the existing ones (which is *not* what I want to do)? Here's what I need. If the user installs the master port, I want to run the patches in files/ in the master port. If the user installs the slave port, I want to run the patches for the slave port, but *not* the ones for the master port. I'm starting to think this would be way, way easier if I just used OPTIONS and skipped the master-slave mess entirely. Paul Schmehl (pauls@utdallas.edu) Adjunct Information Security Officer University of Texas at Dallas AVIEN Founding Member http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/