Re: [gentoo-dev] Some 'proper coding' notes for ebuilds

[Martin Schlemmer <azarah@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1052 bytes --]

On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 05:04, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 02 August 2003 22:50, Kumba wrote:
> > Isn't the only time we want to avoid this on a kernel ebuild?  There was
> > an email many weeks ago on -dev I think (mighta been -core) which said
> > to avoid using epatch on kernel sources, due to it's brute-force method.
> >   Also, what about "xpatch"?  I had heard of this mechanism used awhile
> > ago, but not recently.
> 
> this was meant as a general heads up ... i'm sure the kernel team can handle 
> the kernel ebuilds just fine themselves ;)
> 
> as for xpatch, i havent utilized it myself and havent looked into it ... right 
> now 'epatch' is in portage, 'xpatch' is not ... it doesnt really matter too 
> much since if we upgrade all packages to use epatch, we can easily switch 
> over to 'xpatch'
> 

I do not see why there should be two versions of the same thing.  If
epatch is broken, fix it ?


-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]