On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 08:28:42PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday, December 30, 2010 19:42:35 Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 07:04:25PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > epatch was changed to auto-skip the first path element when it is
> > > absolute (starts with a slash). the reason was to avoid issues with
> > > patches touching files outside of $PWD (which is bad if sandbox is
> > > disabled).
> >
> > +1 from me, but can we have a QA prefix on the ewarn output?
>
> --- eutils.eclass 22 Nov 2010 00:31:03 -0000 1.352
> +++ eutils.eclass 31 Dec 2010 01:28:37 -0000
> @@ -360,6 +360,13 @@ epatch() {
> count=1
> printf "NOTE: skipping -p0 due to absolute paths in
> patch:\n%s\n" "${abs_paths}" >> "${STDERR_TARGET}"
> fi
> + # Similar reason, but with relative paths.
> + local rel_paths=$(egrep -n '^[-+]{3} [^ ]*[.][.]/'
> "${PATCH_TARGET}")
> + if [[ -n ${rel_paths} ]] ; then
> + eqawarn "QA Notice: Your patch has relative paths."
> + eqawarn " In the future this will cause a failure."
> + eqawarn "${rel_paths}"
> + fi
>
> # Dynamically detect the correct -p# ... i'm lazy, so shoot me
> :/
> while [[ ${count} -lt 5 ]] ; do
> -mikeMike, Maybe we should open a tracker to identify which packages use relative paths in their patches before making this control check fatal. Regards, -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410
pgphxSM73NFN6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
