EXTRA_PATCHES considered harmful?

[Julian Elischer]

On 24/9/17 6:37 am, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> On 23 Sep, 2017, at 15:39, Julian Elischer <julian at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> currently if you set EXTRA_PATCHES and the port you are making decides to build a second port as a dependency, EXTRA_PATCHES is passed to the second port which them obiously fails to patch it.
>>
>> e.g.  cd /usr/ports/emulators/open-vm-tools-nox11; Make EXTRA_PATCHES=/foo/bar/patch1
>>
>> will fail when it tries to apply the patch files to each dependency.
>>
>> AM I doing something wrong here?
> Hi Julian,
>
> I think EXTRA_PATCH_TREE is a better option for what you're looking for. You put patches in there in a tree that gets essentially overlaid on the ports tree.
>
> EXTRA_PATCH_TREE=/usr/patches
> Then put your patch1 in /usr/patches/emulators/open-vm-tools-nox11
>
> # Adam
>
>
You are correct and I am moving to that.. In fact I submitted the idea 
of EXTRA_PATCH_TREE, though it was reimplemented during a rewrite.
(but the comments saying what it is are still mine).