Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] eapply: Drop -s option for patch.
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:29:02
Message-Id: 20191213142855.GQ14198@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] eapply: Drop -s option for patch. by "Michał Górny"
1 On 13-12-2019 15:24:40 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
2 > > > ...and why do we consider it correct to apply patches when the context
3 > > > doesn't match? If our only goal is to make things 'easier' for
4 > > > 'everyone', then we could just pass -F9999 and ignore all the context.
5 > > >
6 > > > Though I don't understand why include any context in the first place if
7 > > > you don't care about it matching. Sounds like a waste of space to me!
8 > >
9 > > The patch command defaults to -F2. If that makes no sense, why is it
10 > > the upstream default?
11 > >
12 >
13 > You should ask upstream, not me. But if I were to guess, the answer
14 > would be because patch(1) is used by random people trying to apply
15 > random patches they've found somewhere. We on the other hand are
16 > applying patches that *we* are supposed to provide.
17
18 We are providing those patches, maybe. In reality very often the
19 patches originate from somewhere else though. And you don't want to
20 have to respin all of those just because. At least that's what I feel.
21
22 Thanks,
23 Fabian
24
25 --
26 Fabian Groffen
27 Gentoo on a different level

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies