Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: Re: patches to vendor source trees - discussion
From: Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <20011102212558.F31918@redhat.com>
References: <1004752145 DOT 521 DOT 38 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
	<20011102210311 DOT D31918 AT redhat DOT com> <1004753755 DOT 520 DOT 55 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> 
	<20011102212558 DOT F31918 AT redhat DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Evolution/0.15 (Preview Release)
Date: 03 Nov 2001 13:37:03 +1100
Message-Id: <1004755024.520.61.camel@lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Nov 2001 02:41:21.0617 (UTC) FILETIME=[05B6C410:01C16411]

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?

> Yes, it is.  Lets do that!  If we have a tool that will manage this, I
> think this is a win.

*cough debbuild cough*.
Seriously, thats the goal I've had for over 12 months, and made no
secret of. We have a long way to go though, and I'm inclined to the baby
steps approach.

Making the patch into a single file above the src dir seemed easy
enough, and something that should keep things easy to use for the users
without any special tools. (Something I'd like to put off until we have
enough in setup.exe to leverage existing tools).

Anyway, all I'm proposing _now_ is that the patch sit outside. 

Rob