tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: patch filenames

On 06/01/2008, at 0:50, Roland Illig wrote:


I'd like to change the filenames of patch files, since the naming scheme patch-[a-z][a-z] doesn't give me enough expressiveness for efficient work.

We already had a discussion about this topic in June and July 2004:
        ([change request] pattern for patch filenames)

The discussion revealed that there are some different opinions of how patch files should be named, but arguments for a specific scheme were rare, and suddently the discussion ended. We had these suggestions:

1. Keep everything as is (patch-[a-z][a-z], one patched file per patch):

[pro] simple, easy, and it works.
[pro] short filenames, viewable even on small screens.
[pro] the order in which the patches are applied doesn't matter.
[con] CVS history contains comments on many unrelated patches.

2. Filename based on the patched file, one patched file per patch:

[pro] patch filename shows which file is patched.
[pro] the order in which the patches are applied doesn't matter.
[pro] CVS history contains only changes to this particular file.
[con] the name of the patched file occurs three times: in the filename, in the "---" line, in the "+++" line (redundancy).
[con] there's a naming scheme to be learnt

3. Group functional changes into one patch file:

[pro] the patch can be easily removed once the problem has been fixed upstream. [con] a file may be patched by multiple patches. The order in which the patches are applied becomes important.

I'd like to establish variant 2. (I don't want to displace variant 1, I just want to be allowed to use variant 2 for packages I maintain.) Other opinions?

Except that 3 makes it much easier to feed things back upstream, while 2 does not at all when you patch a single file for multiple different reasons (being configure the most common example).

To solve the order problem, we'd add a "series" file alongside the patches that lists the patch names and thus imposes order among them. Then it'd be trivial to use quilt to manage these patch sets, which is a pretty nice tool when you get used to it :-)

(But I agree that variant 1 is not the most appropriate.)

Julio M. Merino Vidal <>

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index