Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 02/03/2012 15:22, Bertrand Jacquin wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:f9d7e9e2c394b2c5286c22f8678f6df4@..."
type="cite">On 02.03.2012 15:35, Peter Stuge wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Mike Frysinger wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">if you capture all of the
$PORTDIR/$CATEGORY/$PN/ and $A, then
<br>
there should be no need to manually hook into epatch
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
The point of hooking into epatch would be to only have exactly
those
<br>
patches which get applied. Some ebuilds come with a huge set of
<br>
patches, but only few may be applied depending on USE and
version.
<br>
It's nice to have just the right ones.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
epatch is not the only necessary thing, some ebuilds do 'sed -i'
on files. I don't really know for autotools files.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hmm, this is an interesting thought.<br>
<br>
My instinct would be to consider this under the heading of "build
recipe" since it's arguably similar to what the makefile and other
pre-processors are doing. I don't disagree that someone could argue
this all kinds of ways, but I think you would have to be fairly
bloody minded to try for an infringement claim if the ebuild were
provided (since arguably the patch is there)?<br>
<br>
It also occurs to me that it's safer to include all of $
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
FILESDIR, or at least everything without a .patch extension, since
there is also "cp $FILESDIR/somefile $S" to watch for?<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f9d7e9e2c394b2c5286c22f8678f6df4@..."
type="cite">An extension about Mike mind can be an automagic diff
between all SRC_URI freshly src_unpack(ed) and after
install+distclean or after src_prepare. Assuming that not any
other code is modified during src_(compile|install).
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
A very simple solution is to diff the code - however, I claim this
is *incredibly* unhelpful to the whole notion of open source. If I
were the copyright holder then I would far rather have a
cooperative, but accidentally non compliant distributor who has
genuinely made an effort, than someone who just provides a massive
code diff... (Yeah, probably some corner case in that argument, but
the point is that patches like "fix segfault on touching some file"
are infinitely more useful than a massive diff...)<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks for the feedback<br>
<br>
Ed W<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
|
|
