| 1 |
On 10/12/2011 06:30 AM, Steven J Long wrote: |
| 2 |
> Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I don't think that passing multiple files to epatch actually improves |
| 4 |
>> readability. Simple example: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> # bug #123456, foo, bar |
| 7 |
>> epatch "${FILESDIR}"/${P}-foo.patch |
| 8 |
>> # bug #234567, baz bazinga blah blah |
| 9 |
>> epatch "${FILESDIR}"/${P}-baz.patch |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> With multiple arguments, you can't put comments in the middle. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
> ++ It's also a lot easier to remove the single patches when they're no |
| 14 |
> longer needed. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Removing an 'epatch foo' line is easier than 'foo \' ? You are kidding, |
| 17 |
right? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> In the context of configuring, building and installing a |
| 20 |
> package, the extra overhead is miniscule, whereas the above is *much* |
| 21 |
> easier to maintain. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Based on what argument? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Having the comments inside the patch allows everyone, including |
| 26 |
_upstreams_ straight up see what's it for and link to the bug it's |
| 27 |
coming from. Where as keeping them in ebuilds makes it Gentoo specific, |
| 28 |
which is not what we are about. |
Archives