Subject: Re: how can we create PATCHFILES that are not DISTFILES?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 04/19/2002 13:59:52
[ On Friday, April 19, 2002 at 12:02:28 (+0200), Marc Espie wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: how can we create PATCHFILES that are not DISTFILES?
> We encountered and solved this specific problem in OpenBSD a while ago.
> You could replace patch-* with a list of user-defined patterns that
> would be patch-* by default. (I suggest PATCH_LIST for consistency with
> what we use).
That would work, except for the fact that in NetBSD pkgsrc the patch
files are mostly all checksummed so that their distributed checksums can
be checked before they're applied (which catches errors in working
directory maintenance, and sometimes even assists developers :-)....
Of files in PATCHDIR currently only those files matching 'patch-local-*'
are not compared with a checksum in the 'distinfo' file before they're
applied. But these "optional pkgsrc patches" must use names that don't
match 'patch-local-*' since that namespace is reserved for end users.
I suppose a naming convention could be used so that these optional
patches would all be checksummed by the 'makepatchsum' target (which
currently only looks at 'patch-*' files and then avoids those matching
'patch-local-*') so that every checksum would be available in the
distribution of pkgsrc and only the one(s) chosen for use would be
checksummed before being applied. 'optional-patch-*' comes to mind.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>