Joerg Heinicke wrote:
On 12.03.2004 13:01, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:Because I did it :)
executed inI thought that previously all xpatches for all blocks were
order of theone go instead of separately and respecting dependency order.No, one patch after the other was applied previously. The
dependencies was used to define the order of the patches to be applied.Where do you take this from?
So, if the dependencies were correctly set, no problem could occur.
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 :)
Ok I understand now. There is only one global patch-conf target and it preserves dependencies. So my previous assertion that the problem with session-fw dependency needed a change in the build system was incorrect. It should have been just a matter of declaring the correct dependency. Check.
Now should the changes to XConfToolTask be rolled back? I think so, unless it has other advantages.
-- Unico
