[gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[Florian Huber]

Hello developers,
it would be great if could apply patches to a certain sources code
_without_ re-writing the ebuild or installing/injecting it. I would
suggest an envir. variable (like MYCONF) containg the path to a patch.

Bye
	Florian Huber

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[Eric Sammer]

Florian Huber wrote:
> Hello developers,
> it would be great if could apply patches to a certain sources code
> _without_ re-writing the ebuild or installing/injecting it.

For what it's worth, I've answered this exact question for folks in 
#gentoo more times than need be. For some people, patches are required 
(qmail comes to mind as one of the more popular user-patched packages) 
for their environment. While editing an ebuild is not *that* difficult, 
for people new to gentoo or used to just grabbing the source, it's an 
added step that is arguably unnecessary. Using ebuild (the script, not 
the format) to step through the build is easier than editing the ebuild 
itself but adds the issues of ignoring dependencies.

Just $0.02USD.

-- 
Eric Sammer
eric@ineoconcepts.com
http://www.ineoconcepts.com


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[Matt Rickard]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:36:54 +0200
Florian Huber <florian.huber@mnet-online.de> wrote:
> it would be great if could apply patches to a certain sources code
> _without_ re-writing the ebuild or installing/injecting it. I would
> suggest an envir. variable (like MYCONF) containg the path to a patch.
> 

This is possible using the ebuild command explicitely.  'ebuild
ebuildname.ebuild unpack', apply the patches you want (to
/var/tmp/portage/ebuildname), then ebuild compile, install, and qmerge.

Not completely automated, but how often does one need to add additional
patches to packages?  I've found this method to work quite well for me.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[Svyatogor]

Ok, enough is enough. This should go into FAQ. Don't you think so?

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 15:44:36 -0400
Matt Rickard <frogger@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:36:54 +0200
> Florian Huber <florian.huber@mnet-online.de> wrote:
> > it would be great if could apply patches to a certain sources code
> > _without_ re-writing the ebuild or installing/injecting it. I would
> > suggest an envir. variable (like MYCONF) containg the path to a patch.
> > 
> 
> This is possible using the ebuild command explicitely.  'ebuild
> ebuildname.ebuild unpack', apply the patches you want (to
> /var/tmp/portage/ebuildname), then ebuild compile, install, and qmerge.
> 
> Not completely automated, but how often does one need to add additional
> patches to packages?  I've found this method to work quite well for me.
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 


-- 
Let the Force be with us!
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[Michael Kohl]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 538 bytes --]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 23:39:23 +0300
Svyatogor <svyatogor@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Ok, enough is enough. This should go into FAQ. Don't you think so?

The FAQ already has a paragraph about doing the .configure part
manually, maybe this should be made a little more general, e.g. 

"How can I configure/patch a package myself without modifying the
ebuild?

You can do this with the Ebuild command (man ebuild)....."

Michael

-- 
www.cargal.org 
GnuPG-key-ID: 0x90CA09E3
Jabber-ID: citizen428 [at] cargal [dot] org
Registered Linux User #278726

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[C. Brewer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1834 bytes --]

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:49:27 +0800
Michael Kohl <citizen428@cargal.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 23:39:23 +0300
> Svyatogor <svyatogor@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Ok, enough is enough. This should go into FAQ. Don't you think so?
> 
> The FAQ already has a paragraph about doing the .configure part
> manually, maybe this should be made a little more general, e.g. 
> 
> "How can I configure/patch a package myself without modifying the
> ebuild?
> 
> You can do this with the Ebuild command (man ebuild)....."
> 
> Michael

I'm thinking the whole point has been missed in an effort to "make do" with
the current tools.
MYPATCHES="path/to/patches" emerge foo
would definitely be easier than a
ebuild foo.ebuild {fetch|upack} patch sources etc.
For that kind of effort, it would be far easier to edit the ebuild directly.
I think you'd be surprised that on a ~x86 box the number of patches that
need to be added, or better yet, taken out as they are not needed or break
the package under certain circumstances, not to mention the amount of
patches that are included with some ebuilds as a sweeping general purpose
one-size fits all patching. For example, the build for XFree86 contains
patches for several video cards and tablets which get applied regardless of
the card you specify in USE=" ". In closing, the ebuild command is great
when you need to manually play with the ./configure script, but for sorting
patches, it is akin to using a hammer and vice-grips to remove a nut you
don't have the wrench for. I'd like to see this given serious thought, and
not passed off as another "we need to dumb down the FAQ" attempt. If it can
be done with the USE flags, it shouldn't be too hard to tweak this,no?


Thanks



-- 
Chuck Brewer
Registered Linux User #284015
Get my gpg public key at pgp.mit.edu!! Encrypted e-mail preferred.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[rob holland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 699 bytes --]


--On Tuesday, July 08, 2003 10:29:53 -0700 "C. Brewer" 
<cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> wrote:

> For that kind of effort, it would be far easier to edit the ebuild
> directly. I think you'd be surprised that on a ~x86 box the number of
> patches that need to be added, or better yet, taken out as they are not
> needed or break the package under certain circumstances, not to mention
> the amount of patches that are included with some ebuilds as a sweeping
> general purpose one-size fits all patching.

How would MY_PATCHES allow you to not apply a patch?

MY_PATCHES="-notthisone.patch"?

--

robh@gentoo.org / robh:irc.freenode.net
http://dev.gentoo.org/~robh/robh@gentoo.org.asc

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[Norberto BENSA]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 899 bytes --]

nbensa@venkman ~ $ date ; echo ${rob holland}
Tuesday 08 July 2003 02:40 pm

> --On Tuesday, July 08, 2003 10:29:53 -0700 "C. Brewer"
>
> <cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> wrote:
> > For that kind of effort, it would be far easier to edit the ebuild
> > directly. I think you'd be surprised that on a ~x86 box the number of
> > patches that need to be added, or better yet, taken out as they are not
> > needed or break the package under certain circumstances, not to mention
> > the amount of patches that are included with some ebuilds as a sweeping
> > general purpose one-size fits all patching.
>
> How would MY_PATCHES allow you to not apply a patch?
>
> MY_PATCHES="-notthisone.patch"?
>

I'm not sure I understand your statement. What are you trying to say?

MY_PATCHES is a variable and IF is NOT defined, then there're no patches to 
apply. What's the problem?

Norberto

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FEATURE-REQUEST][PORTAGE] Apply custom patches

[rob holland]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1277 bytes --]


--On Tuesday, July 08, 2003 18:27:36 -0300 Norberto BENSA <nbensa@gmx.net> 
wrote:

>> <cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> wrote:
>> > For that kind of effort, it would be far easier to edit the ebuild
>> > directly. I think you'd be surprised that on a ~x86 box the number of
>> > patches that need to be added, or better yet, taken out as they are not
>> > needed or break the package under certain circumstances, not to mention
>> > the amount of patches that are included with some ebuilds as a sweeping
>> > general purpose one-size fits all patching.
>>
>> How would MY_PATCHES allow you to not apply a patch?
>>
>> MY_PATCHES="-notthisone.patch"?
>
> I'm not sure I understand your statement. What are you trying to say?
>
> MY_PATCHES is a variable and IF is NOT defined, then there're no patches
> to  apply. What's the problem?

You said that hacking ebuilds was difficult and that you didn't want to 
have to do it to control which patches are applied to source. Then you said 
(quoted above) that you'd like to be able to _not_ apply patches that are 
listed in the ebuild. Unless I misread.

I don't see how your MY_PATCHES variable acheives this.

--

robh@gentoo.org / robh:irc.freenode.net
http://dev.gentoo.org/~robh/robh@gentoo.org.asc

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]