Re: patches can be either ".patch" or ".diff" files, yes?

["Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1894 bytes --]

On Sat, 19 Jul 2014, Christopher Larson wrote:

>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>       On Fri, 18 Jul 2014, Burton, Ross wrote:
>
>       > On 18 July 2014 19:58, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
>       > >  not sure where i saw this recently (i'll track it down), but some OE
>       > > or yocto doc claimed that patch files *must* be suffixed with
>       > > ".patch". i'm pretty sure it can be either .patch or .diff, correct?
>       > > as in, it's perfectly valid to do this in a .bbappend file:
>
>
> Also remember that as Ross says ('*automatically* applied as a
> patch'), it's not a must, you can opt-in to patch application with
> ;apply=yes if the filename doesn't match the expected extensions.

  ah, that was a detail of which i was unaware -- that "apply=yes" was
meant for applying patches of any arbitrary filename. of course, that
suggests that there are some superfluous uses here and there in
oe-core, such as:

recipes-graphics/xorg-proto/calibrateproto_git.bb:           file://fix.patch;apply=yes"
recipes-graphics/libxsettings-client/libxsettings-client_0.10.bb:        file://link-x11.patch;apply=yes \
recipes-sato/leafpad/leafpad_0.8.18.1.bb:SRC_URI_append_poky = " file://owl-menu.patch;apply=yes "
recipes-sato/settings-daemon/settings-daemon_git.bb:           file://addsoundkeys.patch;apply=yes \

no harm, just unnecessary.

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================