| 1 |
> We really don't want conditional patches, but I from my experience |
| 2 |
> reality is that sometimes you have to. Therefore this should remain |
| 3 |
> possible. I have no problems with highly discouraging conditional |
| 4 |
> patching. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> About your other points, I think they are kind of debatable. Gentoo |
| 7 |
> wants to be close to upstream, but with your set of rules, one can't |
| 8 |
> e.g. add hpn patches to ssh, which would be really silly, as the point |
| 9 |
> of Gentoo is that since you build from source, you can actually apply |
| 10 |
> such patches, conditionally if they don't have a means to be disabled. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Thanks for the input :-) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I understand that it's not 100% avoidable, which is why I was careful to avoid |
| 15 |
the words like "rule" here. It's not my intention to propose any rules here. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
But that's maybe something that needs to be explicitly stated in the devmanual? |
| 18 |
"Conditional patching can sometimes be necessary, and as such it's not a hard |
| 19 |
rule that it shouldn't happen." |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> In other words, I think the gist of your points is to be in an ideal |
| 22 |
> world, but unfortunately reality is far from it. That said, repeating |
| 23 |
> myself, nothing wrong with discouraging quick 'n' dirty, for as long as |
| 24 |
> it remains a big fat warning and advice. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Noted. Thanks again! |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- Thomas |
Archives