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 D84D713888F for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:08:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F5B621C06C; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:08:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5059321C05E for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:08:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot (77-254-165-0.adsl.inetia.pl [77.254.165.0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E8CD533E5E4; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:08:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 12:07:45 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: Alexis Ballier Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] EAPI 6 draft for review Message-ID: <20151018120745.03ca6eaa.mgorny@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20151018112356.6b3d7be6@gentoo.org> References: <22049.17676.1822.986579@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20151017220838.0ae4973f@gentoo.org> <22050.46048.380633.7007@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20151018103109.2ecfc0db@gentoo.org> <20151018104847.50ab5752.mgorny@gentoo.org> <20151018112356.6b3d7be6@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.0 (GTK+ 2.24.28; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_//fhgBMmW=GAHxnrUzgibGnW"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 78b333ed-5eef-4434-912f-4246d7a15cbf X-Archives-Hash: d62febfaf633d66c1108fc0a4afae24d --Sig_//fhgBMmW=GAHxnrUzgibGnW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:23:56 +0200 Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > - what do I, as en ebuild writer, gain from this? =20 > >=20 > > Reliable patching. Unlike epatch, eapply will not succeed when > > the patch unexpectedly applied to the wrong directory. =20 >=20 > Why not, but when exactly would eapply fail where epatch wouldn't > while it should have ? I already told you. When -p1 patch only adds files, epatch is going to merrily apply it as -p0. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_//fhgBMmW=GAHxnrUzgibGnW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWI29xXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ2REJCMDdDQzRGMERBRDA2RUEwQUZFNDFC MDdBMUFFQUVGQjQ0NjRFAAoJELB6GurvtEZOUcsQAMpS4YWSKBfoGCq2YivP8Ox3 eWJTx/TmlGF4VoiPUlkHTo16Hdt05bsbLF5x4vTG0PaUEZT3qUagBkpxrUwpDcYC hOTmSo2mkkto0eCih2OEjIn9jlKtgbg2XLxbwNJmV8iGIN2QnGCD3uRmNeUNTLYg os7CFlL7j7mFxr7GQnk4txyAlsy188bUlP+crX9XKgb+Cpq52KY2o6aJzjQxqiM/ egx57KUC/XV/TUZ8h8rHdUtMJ1uVaEIkWRiSNz/DP7u5SYxwTwAEs79uuQzb8kNk glH1FqWEfScSU+Xt2hejV3IYg9SLkiBignsmF0vf+8tAv6XmHJwjDVwsfdWO5Nmn 0YWX+H1TPKhDbqzSJO9tXp8zy5kRllNzgrakKX5pdKQDohneeuq858Sh9l4gRiHr RDsvGwJ24dTo/c/BXFPJrSbaOxcOYfPiNX4nuDfyv55CLQHPLOcrAvKYdsAGi7Mm nUa3+/F3wOdGuiBxyCKfZR8Ql424vhPN9Afo47Q8VxMf+UM7YMT2vyehNZKHpXiv FKrD5+cy5wSqgBE7sGj8aF4eNaNLrP/wjlLtIGHPIV4tCE6EtvOuONfU6hIQNYcl b8ZkQd5ONXs/SSxwTXSvoIFADhW+X9CrABME1HtAos3ihad1OyNZt581j1zubFVx vxtTAMD2x4Uf9yiR/6B2 =HXsv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//fhgBMmW=GAHxnrUzgibGnW--