From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yann E. MORIN Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 19:23:31 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] u-boot: Allow to specify a list of patches In-Reply-To: <53C77FC8.6060303@mind.be> References: <1405448794-10517-1-git-send-email-ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> <20140715205341.77237719@free-electrons.com> <20140715201336.GE3351@free.fr> <53C6FB6D.2040903@mind.be> <29128166-5526-4da5-804d-72225bc05bc1@email.android.com> <53C77FC8.6060303@mind.be> Message-ID: <20140717172331.GD3737@free.fr> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Arnout, All, On 2014-07-17 09:48 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: > On 17/07/14 06:52, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote: > > Arnout Vandecappelle schreef: > >> On 15/07/14 22:13, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > >>> The more I think about it, the more I find our policy to require > >>> PKG-prefixed patches to be really cumbersome, since the patches already > >>> are in a subdir named PKG/ > >>> > >>> Of course, we're enforcing this naming scheme in BR2_GLOBAL_PATCH_DIR to > >>> be in sync with what we do for our bundled patches. > >>> > >>> But still, if patches were just named NNNN-title.patch, that would be as > >>> efficient at sorting the patches. The PKG- prefix is not really > >>> required, and indeed can cause some troubles with some use-cases, such > >>> as yours. > >>> > >>> Thomas, was there a specific reason we wanted the patches to be > >>> PKG-prefixed? If not, would it make sense to just accept patches without > >>> a PKG-prefix? > >> > >> Er, we don't... We require this specific naming scheme for contributed > >> packages, but the code itself just takes *.patch. > > > > Yes sure, it's a convention only, but the question is: why did we include the package name in the convention? > > I think it's purely historical. And I think it never was required for patches > in a subdir. So we could change the manual to not require patches to be PKG-prefixed? As long as they are number-prefixed, that's all we need, right? So, Ezequiel's patch is really no longer needed, and his use-case to use git-formatted patches is already covered, right? Regards, Yann E. MORIN. -- .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'