Ilia Mirkin <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Emil Velikov <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On 12 September 2016 at 15:35, Ilia Mirkin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Emil Velikov <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Keeping diff/patches in git always felt like a hack, imho. Plus >>>> most/all(?) distros rely on the Mesa headers, so I'm not sure how that >>>> is going to work. >>> >>> The alternatives are considerably more painful for just a handful of >>> files with a small number of diffs. This would be as a tool for >>> developers like us who update the mesa versions by importing new KHR >>> versions, which will not have our local changes applied. The patch >>> would not be used as part of the build process or anything else. >>> >> The goal being to have the patches alongside the patched headers. >> This way one can use them as reference ? Sure sounds great imho. > > Exactly. So that when I download new KHR headers, I just apply the > patch to them (and hope it applies), and if not, look at what was > being done and try to repeat the process. Then I regenerate the patch > against the (new) originals and check the whole thing in.
Or you could just use git like normal: You have a public branch of the unchanged headers. You make your own changes to the headers on master. When you want to update to new upstream headers, you check out the unchanged-headers branch, commit new unchanged upstreams there, check out master, and git merge.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
