suggested patch for bsd.ports.mk

[Julian Elischer]

On 13/05/2016 3:19 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
>> This patch is pretty self explanatory.
>>
>> it allows us to keep patches for various ports separately in a sparse
>> hierarchy while not having to write to the ports tree itself.
> Nice idea ! I'll have a look.
> BTW I've had something somewhat similar for maybe a decade or so
> 	http://berklix.com/~jhs/bin/.csh/customise
> mine does:
> - src + ports,
> - generic + personal diffs as 2 parallel patch trees (cos some of my patches
>    I hope may appeal generaly but some probaly only I will ever want),
> - targets a load of different release levels inc current
> - only does a one off pass, installing files & applying diffs to a virgin
>    tree.
>
> Your approach will be nicer than mine for tracking current ports.
> I look forward to trying it, & if necessary perhaps bending my patch
> trees to fit your macros :-)

thanks.. It works for us and allows us to slide stuff forwards, only 
stopping occasionally to fix a broken patch.

For a "Release"  we check out a snapshot of the ports tree, and branch 
the patches tree in case we want to change or add a patch to that 
snapshot of ports.
  anyone (in ports) think this is a BAD idea?

>
>
>> In case the list scrubs hte text attachment (diff) here's the
>> description part of the diff.
> The MIME enclosure made it through mailman unscathed :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Julian
> --
> Julian Stacey, BSD Linux Unix Sys Eng Consultant Munich http://berklix.eu/jhs/
>   Mail plain text,  No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, MS.doc.
>   Prefix old lines '> '  Reply below old, like play script.  Break lines by 80.
>   Britain denies 700,000+ Brits in EU a vote. http://www.berklix.eu/brexit/
>