From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnout Vandecappelle Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 00:23:41 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] u-boot: Allow to specify a list of patches In-Reply-To: <20140715201336.GE3351@free.fr> References: <1405448794-10517-1-git-send-email-ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar> <20140715205341.77237719@free-electrons.com> <20140715201336.GE3351@free.fr> Message-ID: <53C6FB6D.2040903@mind.be> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net 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. Regards, Arnout -- Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500 Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F