From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Apr  1 20:58:00 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44E58106566C
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Apr 2012 20:58:00 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com
	[209.85.214.54])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1D68FC16
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Apr 2012 20:57:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bkcjc3 with SMTP id jc3so2211608bkc.13
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 13:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	bh=CHu4dH84fwZoZ7aix5K2Vqujiv7jmzsdLtj5I6Z+ghM=;
	b=GfjjM7WZToB85vXqrGv6uOM/xKLIe1RhE17QxIn74l91T35zXL8GJ90khs51QJfdSL
	aUet/ZkHLP5V9gRkgQVGQaQgDrNCX/TG7BSe67x3OC6Uyey+PZuBeiQp+JB1eP5HgIkE
	hAj55JPz6qAGOcRVl5N8P0epgGdfajGjZnarPPZAZunhmV69vif1Jd/C9tIgnKRyhnuv
	+UFt9Uc0zsg5kkyA9dHVrV+2SiYY13J8lvXY5d0qGjMCANqVsShKHS8IUOtGYIT5uSPw
	JRzV97POFcJG17kEmJ9GWUbBhYnJVBx4ejOhI8Hc7078Czz6O6sbzF+YJdTOleWlNHn8
	597g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.205.129.137 with SMTP id hi9mr2557657bkc.131.1333313878535;
	Sun, 01 Apr 2012 13:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.202.142 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 13:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.202.142 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 13:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120401213340.5cea6a29@gumby.homeunix.com>
References: <4F7827A7.3030804@yandex.ru>
	<20120401213340.5cea6a29@gumby.homeunix.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 21:57:58 +0100
Message-ID: <CADLo839MxsKR23=K0Wq6L4T3PVe3qj6SsxFd7qnbKRLZpTCDvQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>
To: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Cc: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Preferred way of applying OSVERSION-dependend patches
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:58:00 -0000

On 1 Apr 2012 21:34, "RW" <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:02:15 +0400
> Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
>
> >
> > Good day!
> >
> > What is a preferred way of doing subj?
> >
> > 1. Add an extra-patch-* to files/ subdirectory and apply it depending
> >     of checks in Makefile (.if ${OSVERSION}).
> > 2. Add an patch-* to files subdirectory that applies unconditionally
> >     and that checking for __FreeBSD_version in app code itself.
> >
> > The second one will guarantee that the patch still applies cleanly on
> > port versions update,
>
> It also works correctly for package files.
>

Not really-- #if directives are evaluated at compile time.

FWIW, I'm not too bothered about it, but #1 strikes me as better practice,
though perhaps GNU-ish;.akin to using if instead of #if.

Chris

Chris