"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hk...@gentoo.org> posted
49c8d6ee.3070...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on  Tue, 24 Mar 2009
13:49:50 +0100:

> Lastly I prefer to have the source changes right there in the ebuild
> when they are not too elaborate and patches don't allow that.

The preference makes sense, but the statement based on it, that patches 
don't allow putting the change in the ebuild, doesn't.  I've used here 
document based patches in my own bash scripts to good effect so I know it 
works, and if it's working in my bash scripts, it's going to work in bash 
script based ebuilds as well.

The only reason patches would need to be file based would be convenience, 
and as soon as it's an inconvenience, with the convenience being having 
them in the ebuild itself, here document based patches to the rescue! =:^)

That "sed", "said" (ha! =:^) does have certain advantages as you pointed 
out, when a specific string change is desired, regardless of context, 
which may well change between versions.

Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Reply via email to