From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24, DMARC_MISSING,FREEMAIL_FROM,FROM_LOCAL_DIGITS,FROM_LOCAL_HEX, FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS,INVALID_DATE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from mailout01.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.80]) by cvs.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 14T767-0004IL-00 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:56:17 -0700 Received: from fwd02.sul.t-online.com by mailout01.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 14T769-0001mg-02; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:56:17 +0100 Received: from helios.bagwan (320095285153-0001@[62.155.143.252]) by fwd02.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 14T760-1gLVdwC; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:56:08 +0100 Received: (qmail 23196 invoked by uid 0); 14 Feb 2001 21:37:24 -0000 Received: from sadchitananda2.bagwan (HELO gottinger.de) (achim@192.168.2.1) by helios.bagwan with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:37:24 -0000 Message-ID: <3A8ACE9B.DBDC6162@gottinger.de> From: 320095285153-0001@t-online.de (Achim Gottinger) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] patcher References: <20010214115149.A16402@cvs.gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sender: 320095285153-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Reply-To: achim@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed Feb 14 11:57:02 2001 X-Original-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:29:48 +0100 X-Archives-Salt: 9a369602-6993-4f2a-b1a0-6b40e5355513 X-Archives-Hash: d1c251e624d884428ee1cb569f4af997 Pete Gavin wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering, wouldn't it be better to keep patches that are > gzipped in the distfiles directory, since cvs doesn't really work well > w/ binary files? I mean, I figure the only patches that should even be > managed by cvs are ones we create ourselves, and under normal > circumstances, those wouldn't be terribly large, so they could go w/o > being gzipped. And since most people update their portage tree using > rsync -z, they would be compressed before being sent over the network, > so that shouldn't cost too much extra bandwidth. > But the cvs tree comes with the next source-cd and then saving space is neccesarry. I try to avoid making my own patches and prefer sed's for minor modifications. Maybe we can move the big patches to distfiles and put them in gentoo-sources on ibiblio. achim~ > > Pete > > _______________________________________________ > gentoo-dev mailing list > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev