Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:12:24 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@apropo.ro> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: one or more patch files / optional patch ? Message-ID: <20040227001224.6eba2542@it.buh.cameradicommercio.ro> In-Reply-To: <20040226212536.GA7216@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20040226232358.71a31aa5@it.buh.cameradicommercio.ro> <20040226212536.GA7216@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:25:36 -0800 Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 11:23:58PM +0200, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > The Porters Handbook says "To make fixes and upgrades easier, you > > should avoid having more than one patch fix the same file"; I'm in > > the reverse situation, e.g. I have to patch 4 files for adding a > > feature to a port. It will only make sense to patch all the files or > > none. Should the patch be split in 4 files or not ? > > Yes, I think this is also documented in the porter's handbook. It's a > real pain in the ass to update patches when there's more than one > patch per file. > > > I also want to use OPTIONS to allow the user to choose if he wants > > this feature or not. How can I integrate this with patch target > > (e.g. having the patch in files/ but only applied if WITH_ is set) ? > > EXTRA_PATCHES Thanks. That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure enough of my english. So I name them extrapatch-feature_name-file_name and they are applied only if I have them in EXTRA_PATCHES. OK, but what if there is a regular patch that applies to one of the files also modified by one of my extra_patches ? Since the "regular" patch is applied after the extras, will it still work ? I could include them in my patches, but I see no way in bsd.port.mk not to apply them. -- IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD user
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040227001224.6eba2542>