Dan Price wrote: > On Tue 30 Sep 2008 at 10:50AM, Bart Smaalders wrote: >> Rather than doing per-build copies of this file, might not a better >> approach be to extract the current policy.conf from the svr4 pkg and >> then apply your changes as a patch? > > Bart-- I looked at this some more. We currently handle power.conf and > other files using nawk, rather than patch(1) or gpatch(1). For some > files, nawk is fine, but when making multi-line changes it seems to > me that patching would be a lot more palatable. > > I'd like to hold off on this for now, and rework this Makefile to apply > a series of patches for some of the files we change-- this will have the > advantage of allowing us to plug in new patches more easily, and should > let us detect problems more easily when patches fail to apply. > > That is to say, something like this: > > (./patch_file_from_pkg.py $(WOS_PKGS)/SUNWcsr etc/pam.conf \ > patches/pam.conf.patch ) > $@ > > To me looks more palatable and sustainable than: > > (./get_file_from_pkg.py $(WOS_PKGS)/SUNWcsr etc/pam.conf; \ > echo "gdm-autologin auth required pam_unix_cred.so.1"; \ > echo "gdm-autologin auth sufficient pam_allow.so.1"; \ > echo "gdm-autologin account sufficient pam_allow.so.1"; \ > echo "gdm-autologin session sufficient pam_allow.so.1"; \ > echo "gdm-autologin password sufficient pam_allow.so.1" \ > ) > $@ > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > > -dp >
Fine... I'd prob. just use get file from pkg into a tmp file and then patch it, but that's up to you. - Bart -- Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/barts "You will contribute more with mercurial than with thunderbird." _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
