On 11/13/10 05:38 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 11/13/10 10:33 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2010-11-13 05:32, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I think the solution everyone liked was either making patch a
dependency or spkgs, and using something like quilt. The current
situation of copying files and/or manually maintaining patches is a
pain and has several drawbacks.
Is there a reason why we don't include GNU patch as a spkg, or it is
just a matter of "nobody ever did it"?
For the pari spkg (remember #9343?), I actually automated the process of
generating patched files from the patches in a file spkg-make. This was
really needed, because there were like 10 patches or so and I was making
a new spkg at least once per day...
Jeroen.
I did it a few months ago
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/patches/patch-2.6.1.spkg
William was against including it, though there was a concensus it should
be included, so William accepted it. But there were still many arguments
about it, and I've never put the package up for review. But I did create
it some months back.
Actually, I realised I had in fact made a trac ticket for it.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9418
Here's the comment from William that he is happy for this package to be added,
despite he personally voted -1 for it
https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/msg/973161fbcc09b7e6?hl=en
I don't know the best way to handle this in the deps file. It's clearly
something that needs to be built very early on, since you could not create a
patch for any package until this is built.
Perhaps this should be added to 'BASE', so put in spkg/base rather than
spkg/standard?
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
