From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <charles@kerrskorner.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_NXDOMAIN,
	DMARC_MISSING,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable
	autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0
Received: from mail8.mgfairfax.rr.com (fe8.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.55])
	by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17F8C25973
	for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 12:37:53 -0600 (CST)
Received: from there ([24.168.185.35]) by mail8.mgfairfax.rr.com  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68);
	 Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:38:42 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Charles Kerr <charles@kerrskorner.org>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] link or patch?
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 13:38:57 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2]
References: <200201131639.g0DGd2m08740@math.Princeton.EDU> <1010949721.20185.2.camel@server.g2.org>
In-Reply-To: <1010949721.20185.2.camel@server.g2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <007b24238180d12FE8@mail8.mgfairfax.rr.com>
Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Developer discussion list <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev>,
	<mailto:gentoo-dev-request@gentoo.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gentoo.org/pipermail/gentoo-dev/>
X-Archives-Salt: 19d9c06a-9996-4abd-b894-15c391cb0e35
X-Archives-Hash: ca248593c76f0d9bf7c662e6486826b9

> In general we prefer to patch the Makefiles (or add the correct flag
> to ./configure).
>
> Best,
> g2boojum
>


Hmm, the only thought on "patching" the file.  As the portage system gets 
larger, it could make a maintenance nightmare as new versions of the app come 
out.  If the library stays low, with a good documentation for the user so 
they supplement with their own set, it isnt so much work. But if the portage 
library as released gets large, keeping it up to date with patches seems like 
a pretty large effort.  (an example of this problem is OpenBSD.  Just put 3.0 
on, and a lot of the ports dont build/install. Rather annoying.).  

Anyway, just  pointing out the potential for a maintenance effort.  If all 
ready thought about, then just ignore this input *smile*.


Charles