On Apr 29, 2012, at 13:27, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> (Are there any guidelines/suggestions
> about filenames of patchfiles? I've seen everything from *.diff to
> *.patch to patch-filename to patch-filename.diff. This is a trivial
> issue though.)
The guideline is that the patchfile name should be "patch-FILE.diff" where FILE
is the path to the file being patched, relative to ${patch.dir} (which unless
you've changed it is the same as ${worksrcpath}). Replace slashes with dashes.
For example if you're patching the file src/lib/foo.h then the patchfile name
would be "patch-src-lib-foo.h.diff".
If you're patching more than one file but all the patches are to solve the same
issue then it might make more sense to have a single patchfile, in which case
you can name it patch-ISSUE.diff" where ISSUE is some short identifier
describing the issue being fixed. For example, many ports are needing patches
these days to be compatible with glib 2.32, so often that patch will get named
"patch-glib-2.32.diff".
Running "port lint --nitpick" will let you know if any patchfile names aren't
following the recommendations. But as you say patchfile naming is trivial, and
we have many ports whose patchfile names don't follow these recommendations,
and I'm not overly concerned about that.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
