-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
>> Furthermore a lot of our patches are in the sed format and I happen to think
>> that's a good thing.
>
> My current view is that "sed patches" should only be used where
> "static" patches do
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> Furthermore a lot of our patches are in the sed format and I happen to think
> that's a good thing.
My current view is that "sed patches" should only be used where
"static" patches don't work, ignoring laziness (including mine)
for the moment.
Why do you feel sed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne neděle 22 Březen 2009 17:50:26 Alin Năstac napsal(a):
>> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
>> versions than ${PV}.
>> Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ali
Dne neděle 22 Březen 2009 17:50:26 Alin Năstac napsal(a):
> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> versions than ${PV}.
> Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
>
> Cheers,
> Alin
Hi,
I was working on patches glep [1] (nothing final and it is highly in p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alin Năstac wrote:
> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> versions than ${PV}.
> Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
I opted to reply to your mail after reading all the other replies.
FWIW, I agree wit
Le 22/03/2009 19:22, Nirbheek Chauhan a écrit :
The ${PV} in the patch name is a quick indication of the age of a
patch, the gnome herd especially *encourages* this behavior.
What I used to do back when I was still bumping packages in the Gnome
Herd, I would version the patch, but I would use
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Mounir Lamouri
wrote:
> Or just rename it ${PN}-bar.patch instead of ${P}-bar.patch if it is a
> patch for more than one ebuild version.
> But older ebuild has to be changed to make it works.
>
The ${PV} in the patch name is a quick indication of the age of a
pat
On Sunday 22 of March 2009 18:18:15 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, mrness wrote:
> > Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> > versions than ${PV}.
> > Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
> And multiply number and total size of fil
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, mrness wrote:
>
>> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
>> versions than ${PV}.
>> Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
>
> And multiply number and total size of files
> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, mrness wrote:
> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> versions than ${PV}.
> Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
And multiply number and total size of files in ${FILESDIR}?
Ulrich
10 matches
Mail list logo
