From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from email.fidnet.com (ecomm2.fidnet.com [216.229.64.81]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with SMTP id A39642016081 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 12:06:06 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 28422 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2002 17:06:05 -0000 Received: from dialup-mo-114.rolla.fidnet.com (HELO silica.localmosci) (216.229.74.114) by email.fidnet.com with SMTP; 12 Apr 2002 17:06:05 -0000 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild policy questions. From: "Tod M. Neidt" To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <1018562103.2980.1.camel@silica.localmosci> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0 (Preview Release) Date: 12 Apr 2002 12:44:32 -0500 Message-Id: <1018633472.10970.0.camel@silica.localmosci> Mime-Version: 1.0 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: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 043082e3-b0b2-41e5-8c29-1eaeeac4ff25 X-Archives-Hash: 7d9401a66979adbd4c222e6cfc230c49 Hi Terje! I should have explicitly discussed the distinction between upstream and third-party patches and those that are specific to Gentoo Linux. I assumed that we were talking about the former in my previous post. Normally gentoo specific patches created by the ebuild author are kept in the files directory. A suffix of "-gentoo" is typically appended to indicate this. For example, xgammon-0.98-gentoo-makefile.patch, or something to that effect. Sorry for any confusion that this may have caused. Regards, tod On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 05:27, Terje Kvernes wrote: > > For patch files (especially large ones) include the URL to the patch > > in the SRC_URI string so that it will be downloaded with the source > > tarball and stored in ${DISTDIR}, i.e. /usr/portage/distfiles by > > default. See the dev-lang/python ebuild for a good example (In fact > > the python ebuild is a good example for a variety ebuild techniques > > for uncommon situations) > > hm. the patches I need total about 1K, and I _could_ host the > patches via http. > > > If the patch files are small (working definition of small not much > > larger than the ebuild itself), placing them in the files directory > > is ok, but the former method is prefereable. > > okay, I'll try getting them to work via http. hour>. okay, done. :) now just to check that things work and > submit. should I attach the patches as well? > >