[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User hjs changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|VERIFIED |CLOSED --- Additional comments from h...@openoffice.org Mon Mar 30 14:32:45 + 2009 --- . - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User rt changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED --- Additional comments from r...@openoffice.org Fri Jan 23 13:39:40 + 2009 --- Looks good now on CWS ause099. Verified. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User hjs changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED Target milestone|--- |DevTools --- Additional comments from h...@openoffice.org Thu Jan 22 15:27:42 + 2009 --- . - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@tools.openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@tools.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: allbugs-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: allbugs-h...@openoffice.org
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 25 22:51:55 +
2008 ---
oh man, {$(PATCH_FILES)} expands to something useful. You do know you're
probably the only person on the planet that knows dmake makefile.mk syntax :-)
-
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User hjs changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |58290) quite untested but | |survives jfreereport on li | |nux --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 25 17:40:53 + 2008 --- Created an attachment (id=58290) quite untested but survives jfreereport on linux - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 24 18:15:40 + 2008 --- this path still assumes that patches reside in the module root. see jfreereport for an example. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |58264) sample usage for e. | |g. rhino --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 24 17:05:20 + 2008 --- Created an attachment (id=58264) sample usage for e.g. rhino - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |58263) something like this | | I guess --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 24 17:02:10 + 2008 --- Created an attachment (id=58263) something like this I guess - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 19 11:48:56 + 2008 --- I like that idea :-) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 18 13:28:07 + 2008 --- beside that the patch is a bit stale meanwhile (ok, i didn't pay too much attention when it was new...), the applying part isn't the problem. what i don't like is the generation part that involves too much manual copying. why not diffing the the changed tree with a reference tree already containing all patches beside the current change? this difference would make up a new patch that's generated and just has to be added to the makefile, as in your approach. what i want to keep is the cycle of change, build that change and create a patch containing exactly that change. without introducing manual steps that give you a tree that builds fine but will give you an incomplete patch because you forgot to copy something to somewhere in advance. the only drawback i see in that scenario is that you'll only be able to create new patches. changing existing ones will be a hassle and probably end up in creating all existing patches from scratch if the overlap is too big. and yes, it will be slower than gendiff as you always compare the whole tree but i think it's worth it... - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Assigned to|cmc |hjs --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 18 09:05:51 + 2008 --- hmm, did I assign it to you ? cmc->hjs: What do you think of the second approach ala gendiff ? "automate and standardize applying patches as well as creating patches as much as possible." does sort of require a change of practice from the current mechanism in order to auto-generate patches, but supports multiple "per-feature" patchsets so build-fixes can be kept separate from adding-feature patches - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User rene changed the following: What|Old value |New value Assigned to|rene |cmc --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 17 17:11:25 + 2008 --- why is this assigned to me? - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User er changed the following: What|Old value |New value CC|'cmc,hjs' |'cmc,er,hjs' --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 11 17:59:13 + 2007 --- Much interested in this [mainly for ICU, of course]. The current patch handling makes it awfully awkward to upgrade an external library if there were patches applied already. Once patches are accumulated in the one big patch file there's no chance to identify whether single patches are still needed other than reading the entire patch file, heck you even have to know which files belong together if a patch touched more than one file, even more because when regenerating the patch file, file dates are updated on each iteration. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value CC|''|'cmc,hjs' Issue type|ENHANCEMENT |PATCH --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Dec 8 14:44:07 + 2007 --- cmc->hjs/rene: How about this implementation to allow multiple patches, seems to work for me. I'd prefer multiple patches for the externals because we have no idea looking at our existing patches what the hell they're really for as we've bundled into a single patch the fixes for build problems, warning as errors and enhancements. It would be *way* more preferable to have them split up, at least new ones, into one per purpose. Ideally even with an upstream bugzilla id in the patch name where it was submitted back to those probjects for a warning fix or the enhancement added by OOo. For example the rhino patch is horrific. Part of it I've unpicked to figure out that it merely updates it to the next patch level or two of rhino, while the other part is the substantive customization for OOo while the next part is just to add a makefile.mk to build it with dmake and the final part is to add in those otherly-authored java files from the original Sun tutorial on extending rhino. As part of the solenv suggestion attached here is a gendiff.sh diff maker which follows the same pattern that we use in fedora to help the auto patch making process. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |50182) purely for example | |purposes a demo in rhino --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Dec 8 14:30:46 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=50182) purely for example purposes a demo in rhino - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[tools-issues] [Issue 40246] please support more than o ne patchfile
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=40246 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |50181) possible patch to i | |mplement this --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Dec 8 14:30:14 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=50181) possible patch to implement this - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
