>A program that takes v1.deb and v2.deb can output the list of patches added >and removed, as well as whether the meta-data for the package (scripts/* ?) >was changed.
This means that we switch to debian releases as our upstream? >For both of these packages it is fairly easy to generate a fully patched >source directory which can be diffed. Alternatively the patches are also >kept in a structured manner and can be extracted. The patches monitor needs are patchs to the Nix expressions to fetch fresher tarball. >I can see a need for adding a bit more meta-data into nixpkgs when >"upstream" is no longer the author of the software, but "upstream" is a >collection of distributions as well. For example, the latest .deb or .rpm >that has been "processed" or "consumed" so that only new patches relative >to those bases should be considered by the monitor. I doubt that switching between Debian patched versions and Fedora patched versions at random moments is a good idea. For various reasons… _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
