From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506C31381F3 for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 02:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D2838E0980; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 02:00:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.182]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03930E095A for ; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 02:00:23 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFLd/xm/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEATocKAsLIRMHCw8FJTeICwbBLY1hgkhhA41+iA6FfohwgV6DEw X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFLd/xm/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEATocKAsLIRMHCw8FJTeICwbBLY1hgkhhA41+iA6FfohwgV6DEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="17790440" Received: from 75-119-252-102.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO waltdnes.org) ([75.119.252.102]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with SMTP; 03 Jul 2013 22:00:16 -0400 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 03 Jul 2013 22:00:19 -0400 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 22:00:19 -0400 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [gentoo-kernel] Proper distribution integration of kernel *-sources, patches and configuration. Message-ID: <20130704020019.GA13446@waltdnes.org> References: <20130701164149.131490f8@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130701181749.GA3831@kroah.com> <20130701205615.18fdcea2@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130701212542.60f86307@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130701193330.GA31073@kroah.com> <20130701215045.5f8099d3@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130703104555.GA9789@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20130703144256.68e4aef8@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130703144256.68e4aef8@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: b941fb73-7402-4919-adda-9dd1ba865cb9 X-Archives-Hash: da90923e3083fa9e1c10e069b775a025 On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 02:42:56PM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote > With USE=-experimental (which will be the default) they are excluded by > default, after enabling that the user can exclude patches by setting > UNIPATCH_EXCLUDE through the package.env mechanism. Here's my user, not-a-developer, perspective. I think that there should be a mechanism to enable one patch at a time. Here's the rationale... Assume that there are 50 different patches available. I may want/need features provided by 1 of those patches. I probably do *NOT* want to enable the other 49 patches. This is similar in concept to enabling one ~amd64 ebuild, versus globally enabling ~amd64. Even if I can come up with the list of the 49 patches to exclude, what happens when the next developer comes along with patch #51? Does it get applied next time I build a kernel (ouch)? IANAD (I Am Not A Developer), but if I did want to apply custom patches, I think the right approach would be to somewhere manually modify UNIPATCH_LIST. If that approach won't work, maybe a USE_EXPAND flag make.conf might be the way to go. E.g. CUSTOM_PATCH="foo bar" would resolve to USE="custom_patch_foo custom_patch_bar" -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications