From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:29:51 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 08/35] packages: apply custom patches using *.patch instead of -*.patch In-Reply-To: <20150329213551.GI4093@free.fr> References: <1427650429-9293-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1427650429-9293-9-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20150329213551.GI4093@free.fr> Message-ID: <20150330092951.7ec4a63d@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Yann E. MORIN, On Sun, 29 Mar 2015 23:35:51 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > At first, I was wondering if we could not simply get rid of al those > custom hooks, and do something like: > > BR2_GLOBAL_PATCH_DIR += $(BR2_TARGET_AT91BOOTSTRAP_CUSTOM_PATCH_DIR) > > and so on for the others. > > But it turns out that we're only looking into sub-directories of > BR2_GLOBAL_PATCH_DIR, so the above sould not work. No, it does not work, because BR2_TARGET_AT91BOOTSTRAP_CUSTOM_PATCH_DIR is directly the directory where the patches are, while BR2_GLOBAL_PATCH_DIR expects the at91bootstrap patches to be in an at91boostrap/ directory. > Second, I'm afraid this would break the case where someone has all the > patches in a single directory, and use the 'package' prefix to > differentiate what package a patch would apply, like so: > > /path/to/my/patches/at91bootstrap-patch-1.patch > /path/to/my/patches/at91bootstrap3-patch-1.patch > /path/to/my/patches/barebox-patch-1.patch > /path/to/my/patches/linux-patch-1.patch > ... > > This change would break that setup, would it not? Yes, it would. But on the previous iterations of those patches, Arnout said it was OK to break this setup. See http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2015-March/123006.html. Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com