On 1 July 2010 20:25, Mike Hansen <mhan...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:05 PM, David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: >> I don't understand your proposal. Would it need the patch command >> added to Sage? I don't understand your method, so can't comment >> really. > > William's proposal is to > > 1) Standardize the filenames of patches so that the only file which > patches ./src/foo/bar/xyz.py is ./patches/foo/bar/xyz.py.patch > > 2) Only the .patch file is checked into the repository. > > 3) When doing "sage -spkg" to create an spkg, it goes through all of > the patches under ./patches/ and uses the patch command to make the > patched file which is copied over. In the above example, the "sage > -spkg" script would automatically make ./patches/foo/bar/xyz.py from > ./src/foo/bar/xyz.py and ./patches/foo/bar/xyz.py.patch. Thus, only > patch needs to be installed on the machine which creates the original > spkg.
Many patches are currently applied conditionally - usually dependent on the operating system of the system to which the Sage source will be installed. One I can think of is applied only on the newer sun4v systems like 't2' but not on older SPARC systems. But whether it gets applied or not also depends on an environment variable. Whilst applying patch as a result of an environment variable is not common, applying them by operating system is very common. I don't see how that situation could be handled by this method unless we distribute a source for OS X, another for Linux, another for Solaris ... etc etc. Dave -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
