cvs commit: src/secure/lib/libssh Makefile config.h openbsd-compat,port-tun.c.patch version.h src/secure/usr.bin/ssh ssh_config.5.no_obj.patch src/secure/usr.sbin/sshd Makefile auth-passwd-freebsd.c auth2.c.patch servconf.c.patch ...
Simon 'corecode' Schubert
corecode at fs.ei.tum.de
Wed Oct 4 11:30:07 PDT 2006
Matthew Dillon wrote:
:I have to say that this patch framework is continually becoming a major p=
:ain in the ass. Using vendor branches directly would allow me to resolve=
: conflicts much faster than it is now.
:I'm getting patch rejects which i have to fix manually, then i have to ex=
Hmm. Well, the CVS vendor tag stuff has always caused me trouble, but
I'm wondering if an even better solution would be to avoid the whole
mess (at least for everything except GCC) and start integrating PKGSRC
builds for the needed pieces into our buildworld.
I don't think this is a good idea at all. For instance, take the -m enhancement for cvs, which I committed some months ago. I doubt the pkgsrc people would pick up this patch. Additionally, maintaining pkgsrc as a part of base makes it even more complicated and makes us more dependant on external infrastructure. Additionally, it would increase build time (all those configures) and we would lose a big share of stability.
Actually, CVS vendor tags aren't that complicated. I never found out with what people have the big problem.
Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\
Work - Mac +++ space for low â¬â¬â¬ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ /
Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \
Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: "Description: OpenPGP digital signature"
More information about the Commits