On Mar 18, 2018, at 04:04, Jan Stary wrote:
> While we're here:
>
How will you distinguish patchfiles from others
>
>> The lint check in question doesn't look at the contents of files/, it
>> looks at the patchfiles option.
>
> what e.g. OpenBSD does is it has a patches/ subdirectory in t
While we're here:
> >> How will you distinguish patchfiles from others
> The lint check in question doesn't look at the contents of files/, it
> looks at the patchfiles option.
what e.g. OpenBSD does is it has a patches/ subdirectory in the port dir.
Anything in there is a patch to be applied. N
On 2018-3-17 09:05 , Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On 16 March 2018 at 15:02, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 16, 2018, at 08:40, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>
>>> How will you distinguish patchfiles from others, like select lists, ed
>>> files, Makefiles etc?
>>
>> I wouldn't. If the author of the portfile
On 16 March 2018 at 15:02, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> On Mar 16, 2018, at 08:40, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>
>> How will you distinguish patchfiles from others, like select lists, ed
>> files, Makefiles etc?
>
> I wouldn't. If the author of the portfile finds that distinction important,
> they could con
On 2018-3-16 22:39 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> I would be happy if lint were changed to just check that patchfile names end
> with .diff or .patch. Would anyone object to that?
I could've sworn we had this conversation years ago and this was the
conclusion. :)
So yes, please do make this change.
-
On Mar 16, 2018, at 08:40, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> How will you distinguish patchfiles from others, like select lists, ed files,
> Makefiles etc?
I wouldn't. If the author of the portfile finds that distinction important,
they could continue to maintain it. port lint wouldn't care.
> I suppor
On Mar 16, 2018, at 08:03, Arno Hautala wrote:
> The only reason I can think of for keeping the prefix is that all
> patches would be sorted together in a file listing. Not a very strong
> reason.
Nothing would prevent a port author from continuing to do that, if they wish to.
How will you distinguish patchfiles from others, like select lists, ed
files, Makefiles etc? I support relaxing rules, but you cannot even rely on
all files matching the relaxed version form.
See also recent discussion about whether lint should return nonzero value
on warnings.
Mojca
The only reason I can think of for keeping the prefix is that all
patches would be sorted together in a file listing. Not a very strong
reason.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 7:39 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> I think we should relax the restrictions on patchfile naming currently
> implemented in port lint
I think we should relax the restrictions on patchfile naming currently
implemented in port lint. I'd like to discuss it here before I file a ticket.
Currently, we complain if a patchfile is not named "patch-*.diff". But we
already have many files in the repository named "*.patch" for example. We
10 matches
Mail list logo
