Re: is there a standard way to get the g-b-s to apply multiple patches?

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Eric Blake wrote: > According to Brian Dessent on 1/11/2006 7:03 AM: > > Example: > > > > $ ./foo-1.0-1.sh prep conf build > > # decide that for some reason you want to start over > > $ rm -rf foo-1.0/ > > $ ./foo-1.0-1.sh prep conf build > > > > However, the second build will

Re: is there a standard way to get the g-b-s to apply multiple patches?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Brian Dessent on 1/11/2006 7:03 AM: > Example: > > $ ./foo-1.0-1.sh prep conf build > # decide that for some reason you want to start over > $ rm -rf foo-1.0/ > $ ./foo-1.0-1.sh prep conf build > > However, the second build will not cont

Re: is there a standard way to get the g-b-s to apply multiple patches?

Eric Blake wrote: > Take a look at bash and readline, where I distinguish between Chet Ramey's > official upstream patches vs. my cygwin-specific patches; the > bash-3.0-14.patch contains only my differences after the upstream patches > have been applied. In particular, my modifications to g-b-s

Re: is there a standard way to get the g-b-s to apply multiple patches?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes on 1/11/2006 5:00 AM: > I'm working on updating the fortune package and switching to use the > generic build script, but I'd like to have the source package to have > the original source, the current debian patches,

is there a standard way to get the g-b-s to apply multiple patches?

I'm working on updating the fortune package and switching to use the generic build script, but I'd like to have the source package to have the original source, the current debian patches, and a separate patch file with my patches. The debian package maintainer is also the maintainer of the upstrea