On Friday 29 July 2005 11:14 am, Dan Armak wrote: > On Friday 29 July 2005 17:58, Duncan wrote: > > Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò posted > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, > > > > on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:11:46 +0200: > > > On Friday 29 July 2005 16:05, Dan Armak wrote: > > >> Anyway, the effective change would be to die if patching fails (and > > >> support patchlevels != 0), so my orig question stands. > > > > > > epatch already takes care of failing, that's why I was thinking about > > > that > > > > > > :) > > > > More on the point... what about replacing the current base.eclass code > > with appropriate calls to epatch? This would mean changes/fixes to > > epatch would automatically propagate, while continuing to maintain > > compatibility by keeping the base.eclass functionality around. > > Well as I wrote in my previous reply, I see no objection. I wanted to make > sure this is OK with all base.eclass users, beyond kde.eclass.
from a QA point of view, no package should apply a patch, have the patching fail, but continue to emerge ... who knows what kind of garbage you'll end up with -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
