Adam Heath writes: > Bdale hates dbs, doesn't know what it is, so I don't trust his assement of > the > issue. I never said glibc nor gcc use dbs. They use a system like dbs, one > I > feel is incorrect(each .dpatch system includes code to apply the patch, > which, > I feel, is code duplication).
There was no alternative system, when I "designed" the dpatch system. The code duplication is needed, because a .dpatch is self-contained. For most cases it calls patch with the .dpatch file as the patch file. Other commands are run after applying the patch. Currently that's only the case for configure. It's tedious to regenerate the patches if you have two independent patches for a configure.in. But yes, you could extend this format to use Pre-Patch and Post-Patch commands.
