From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 08:34:58 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] RFC: package patching In-Reply-To: <20111118080500.213b42b0@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Fri, 18 Nov 2011 08:05:00 +0100") References: <20111116190306.6e9596a0@skate> <201111172123.05834.arnout@mind.be> <20111117224211.0e793a0b@skate> <20111118080500.213b42b0@skate> Message-ID: <8762ihanod.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Hi, >> - for packages that have multiple versions at once in buildroot, >> patches go into package/foo/foo-version, but have the same filename: >> --.patch Thomas> I would name the directory package// instead of Thomas> package//-, because repeating is useless. Agreed, but that might break existing users (but the number of people having a version-specific subdir with custom patches is probably quite small, so it might be ok). Thomas> I also would like to see removed: Thomas> * Support for *.patch.$(ARCH). But that requires some work to get rid Thomas> of the current 4 arch-specific patches that we have for liboil, fbv, Thomas> libmad and jamvm. Thomas> * Support for host-*.patch (which are applied only to the host Thomas> variant). We have only one such patch in the tree (for libgtk2) and Thomas> with a bit of effort, we could make it generic enough so that it Thomas> works on both host and target. Agreed. >> Some remaining questions: >> * what if a package has multiple versions, and a certain patch applies >> to both versions. Should there be one copy of the patch in >> package/foo, or should the patch be duplicated in >> package/foo/foo-version1 and package/foo/foo-version2 ? Thomas> Duplicated. Agreed. >> * how many digits should the sequence number have? I now that >> git-format-patch uses 4 digits (0001) but really isn't necessary for >> buildroot since the number of patches we'll have for each package is >> limited. A package with 99 patches would already be extraneous, so I'd >> say 01 (2 digits) is enough. >> This may seem like a detail, but discussing this should keep things >> consistent throughout the future. Thomas> Agreed that 2 digits is enough. Me too. -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard