Joerg Heinicke wrote: > > On 12.03.2004 13:01, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > >>I thought that previously all xpatches for all blocks were > executed in > >>one go instead of separately and respecting dependency order. > > > > No, one patch after the other was applied previously. The > order of the > > dependencies was used to define the order of the patches to be > > applied. > > So, if the dependencies were correctly set, no problem could occur. > > Where do you take this from? Because I did it :)
>From what I see at [1] there was > exactly one patch-conf target, for the dependencies we would > need one target for every cocoon block. Or do I miss something? > Actually, I don't know anymore...I only know before I change that, the dependencies weren't preserved, with the changes it worked very well. But that's the past anyway :) Carsten
