From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SMXRo-0003Kc-BC for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 04:33:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA511E0C1B; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 04:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f53.google.com (mail-vb0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1812BE08C2 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 04:33:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbbfc26 with SMTP id fc26so247801vbb.40 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:33:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=4n7SR0f4j8Lf8/4J4T52ELPa7jj2VZ0TFzYfufZneck=; b=H2k30dMwtUk/AiNZJ5mH5qzNEy933BYGmBvY5mGs0WVEsf2B26KjMvhGeCmDrHdA4G zBJDrRlaoIxPy1KB0XmoCotqaHL43iOaFQ8qhr21aouGIcfa98I6Yc2HmnNhJ1LLWoo9 Z+KT/yimXOWf9V3E9mVIW/HAOjVZq6DeIhJWNBKgXbr9a1PUZ+i/DgU0+XvTBXWxkEqq MRPWBLtAYsZ4x7OavApwChRxxcL2bFbqInHbhm9Pg09pL8rLzVAfDxtdEoENUzZ78/vR ahp+04ZrXxqcxCVkAdu86QeBVxsI68yKWLaV62kgvjQN2r86JFxy2vibR3FZEZKXVUW6 wMrg== 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 Received: by 10.220.151.71 with SMTP id b7mr4458919vcw.62.1335241982602; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Sender: cardoe@cardoe.com Received: by 10.220.91.198 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:33:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201204240010.31805.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <201204240010.31805.vapier@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 23:33:02 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vgPRTLmk2bTJqChI279Ax8c1WRA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] epatch_user usage From: Doug Goldstein To: Mike Frysinger Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnTnbDGk5+hvAuJAr8dnMkTWEcqvctCtot09prhUj1PcG7s85pjcenFrLG6LZwY9sPydyNg X-Archives-Salt: 71be9dd5-2d83-4993-a26b-1e232e24b5cf X-Archives-Hash: d5b5e78520da4205cd54a62c50b22d19 On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 23 April 2012 23:45:36 Doug Goldstein wrote: >> So I've just had one reservation when using epatch_user for allowing >> users to apply patches. And that's figuring out when to run >> eautoreconf. I don't necessarily want to run it unconditionally but >> sometimes users have patches which touch autoconf files but my >> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone >> have a suggested way to handle this? > > just always call it when the user applies patches. =C2=A0i don't see a bi= g deal. > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0epatch_user && eautoreconf > -mike That works. I was wondering if you guys did anything more crafty but this is fine. Thanks all for the input. --=20 Doug Goldstein