On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 11:55:45PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> I'd prefer:
>
> if [ "$$REPLY" != N ]; then \
>
> so that by default we keep the current behavior. I think it's good to
> push people to check patch comments that might not be accurate any more.
Fair point.
I went for 'n' so the capital yes equivalent indicates the default reply.
Index: bsd.port.mk
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk,v
retrieving revision 1.1414
diff -u -p -r1.1414 bsd.port.mk
--- bsd.port.mk 4 Jun 2018 06:14:56 -0000 1.1414
+++ bsd.port.mk 8 Jun 2018 22:30:32 -0000
@@ -2362,11 +2362,12 @@ update-patches:
PATCH_LIST='${PATCH_LIST}' DIFF_ARGS='${DIFF_ARGS}' \
DISTORIG=${DISTORIG} PATCHORIG=${PATCHORIG} \
${_PERLSCRIPT}/update-patches`; \
- case $$toedit in "");; \
- *) read i?'edit patches: '; \
- cd ${PATCHDIR} && $${VISUAL:-$${EDITOR:-/usr/bin/vi}} $$toedit;; esac
-
-
+ if [ -n "$$toedit" ]; then \
+ read -r REPLY?'edit patches? [Yn]: '; \
+ if [ "$$REPLY" != n ]; then \
+ cd ${PATCHDIR} && $${VISUAL:-$${EDITOR:-/usr/bin/vi}}
$$toedit; \
+ fi; \
+ fi
.endif # IGNORECMD
