Dirk Nehring dixit:
>And that's my problem: even for smaller packages you will loose
>everything: no patch documentation
How about you write some documentation at the beginning of
the patch file, between the $FreeWRT$ and the --- oldfile ?
It's supposed to work that way. (We usually indent the docs
by one tabulator, so patch(1) definitively skips it.)
>Try to find the patch which releases the IP on udhcp exit. Make
>your own opinion.
grep?
>My assumption is that the new style will be mostly unmaintainable, the
Now, come on. FreeWRT is a relatively small project. We do not
have many packages with patches that large. If you're the respon-
sible maintainer for e.g. busybox, you know your stuff, and you
won't "ok" others' commits without double-checking.
That said, it was clear from the beginning that the kernel will
not adopt the "update-patches" style, because many of the diffs
themselves are maintained outside.
bye,
//mirabile
--
"Using Lynx is like wearing a really good pair of shades: cuts out
the glare and harmful UV (ultra-vanity), and you feel so-o-o COOL."
-- Henry Nelson, March 1999
_______________________________________________
freewrt-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.freewrt.org/lists/listinfo/freewrt-developers
