On 5/17/24 11:32, Michael J Gruber wrote:
Kevin Kofler via devel venit, vidit, dixit 2024-05-16 22:39:00:
Panu Matilainen wrote:
Patch and source numbers start from zero, that goes for automatically
numbered patches too. So there's an off by one in the application, and
the latter %autopatch which is supposed to apply patches >= 2 simply has
nothing to do, and falls through silently. That's a bug of course in
itself, filed now:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/3093
And then they say the automagic is a good idea because it prevents people
from accidentally forgetting to apply a patch, LOL.
This would not have happened with autosetup. If you overwrite
automatisms (using invidual patch numbers and flags) you need to know
what you are doing. So this is a very weak argument:
Yes, Kevin missed the point by a wide margin. The problem was exactly
that the manually numbered patch applications carry these kind of risks.
It's really, really easy to add "PatchXYZ: foo.patch" and forget to add
the corresponding %patch XYZ entry, in whatever form. Which is why you
should let %autosetup do it.
- Panu -
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
