> No, you're just missing the point. Suppose I have a package that DOES > need a few changes to .c files in order to compile. Now, of course, I > don't know what those changes are BEFORE I begin working on the package. > [omissis]
OK, got the point. You're right. >> Package with spkg moved just before "conf" and after "prep" (it >> seemed a bit overkill to call it -3 for just this small change): >> http://www.lapo.it/tmp/libungif-4.1.0-2.tar.bz2 >> http://www.lapo.it/tmp/libungif-4.1.0-2-src.tar.bz2 > Anyway this package is quite "stable" (i.e. I think it will hardly have a new version so big that will needs a patch) so maybe that version is good enough to be shipped? In the general case using the gigantic-patch is more flexible as it permits to edit at will, but in this case no patch is needed except the CYGWIN-PATCHES directory. In fact that version is dated 22 January 1999, I doubt it will have a new version at all. But if you like more so I can modify the script so that mkpatch prints the warning as of your "example 3". -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
