I demand that François-Denis Gonthier may or may not have written... > On 2 November 2005 09:13, Junichi Uekawa wrote: >>> I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang >>> packages. The biggest change is that the package is now fully using >>> dpatch, *but*, basing myself on some other package I've seen (coreutils >>> for example), I've put the compressed upstream right in the package. It >>> is extracted using a dpatch scriptlet.
>>> Is it okay to do that, for one thing? >> Out of interest, I would be interested in the advantages of having a >> tarball like that. > oh, and it totally helps to keep _all_ changes in check. If I change > anything outside dpatch-edit-patch, it'll be gone at the next cleaning. > It's a bit of a hassle but since I always feared that a change I've made to > the upstream source could end up silently in the diff and break the build > on some platforms, I think it's a good thing to force myself to go through > dpatch. Use lsdiff (in patchutils) to find out if a patch is in the wrong place: $ lsdiff -z ../foo_1.2.3-4.diff.gz | grep -v /debian/ You can move the offending patches into a file in debian/patches/ with filterdiff and dpatch-edit-patch: $ filterdiff -zx '*/debian/*' ../foo_1.2.3-4.diff.gz | patch -Rp1 $ dpatch-edit-patch 99_bar $ filterdiff -zx '*/debian/*' /proc/$PPID/cwd/../foo_1.2.3-4.diff.gz | patch -p1 $ exit All that remains is to update the list of patches and to rebuild... (I've deliberately done this a few times, and have also accidentally let patches through...) -- | Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | linux (or ds) at | sarge, | Northumberland | youmustbejoking | RISC OS | Toon Army | demon co uk | Retrocomputing: a PC card in a Risc PC Wishful thinking on your part doesn't constitute reality on mine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
