Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/11/03/19:44:12
On Sun, 2001-11-04 at 02:25, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 01:37:03PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> > >On Sat, 2001-11-03 at 13:25, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > >> On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 01:15:54PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> > >> >On Sat, 2001-11-03 at 13:03, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > >> >>Couldn't the patch remove itself?
> > >> >
> > >> >Not if you create the patch via diff!
> > >>
> > >> Why? The patch could patch itself into a zero length file and the file
> > >> could be removed via "patch -E".
> > >
> > >To make the patch a zero length file, the entire contents need to be
> > >listed with a - before each line right?
> > >
> > >so how long is a file that completely contains itself?
> > Yep. You're right. If the patch was constructed from diff and if there
> > was only one file, you couldn't have the patch delete itself.
> How about a script? Call it say pristine-src or something like that.
> You would give it a package-version for the parameter. Then the script
> would apply the patch and if successful remove the patch file. You
> could even give it some options to allow for a backup of the current src
> directory first.
Sure. But this is all predicated on the patch being in the source dir.
(And someone needs to write the script).
Chuck, I haven't heard from you on this bar the initial comments - and
given the number of packages you maintain....
Also, please note: I'm not suggesting that anyone has to repackage
existing stuff... only that new packages, and new releases of existing
packages should follow the guidelines we establish. I think anything
else would be madness.
- Raw text -