On 8/1/2015 3:09 PM, Marco Righele wrote:
* If my patch touches a file already modified by a FreeBSD patch in
files/, is it ok to use the same
name ? (I'm thinking in the case the new patch could be used
upstream).
There are no name clashes because the dports patch goes in the
"dragonfly" directory and it's applied after the patches in the files
directory.
I suggest that you try "make patch", then go to the
/usr/obj/dports/<cat>/<portname>/work/<topdir>, then use the "portfix"
(or genpatch) utility in /usr/dports/ports-mgmt/genpatch in order to
create a properly formatted patch. In the case you outline, there
should be an ".intermediate" extension which indicates it's a patch to
an already patched file.
Thanks for the suggestions, I will try them out.
Somebody has to put it in deltaports. If you submit it to dports then
you are in effect asking somebody else to adapt it to deltaports. So
"quick" is relative. It might be quick for you, but a huge burden for
the person trying to incoporate it. And they'd try tricks like
"replace
patch in files with this one". That won't fly.
Ah, but I didn't mean that. What I was looking for was a way to generate
the dports tree
from the DeltaPorts tree (but without the part about building the
packages),
so that I can check if everything works before the pull request.
In fact it seems that the merge.sh from scripts/generator is quite close
to what I had in mind;
I have to merge the whole tree but it doesn't take much time so I guess
I will be fine
with that.
Marco
