Local patches to ports?

[N. Raghavendra]

At 2008-09-09T15:12:48-04:00, Linda Messerschmidt wrote:

> After our last upgrade to 7-STABLE (7.1-PRERELEASE) our local build process
> started producing broken binaries but the port has patches and one of them
> makes it work.  So, this seems like a good time to replace our build process
> with the ports collection.
>
> What's the best way to preserve our local patches and our custom
> configuration flags, and get them to apply to each new update of the port?

I would create a separate Apache port incorporating the local changes
to the source as well as the necessary fixes from `www/apache13'.
This would help in avoiding conflicts between the local patches and
the ones in `www/apache13'.  This is, IMO, easier to maintain in the
long term.  I maintain several local ports for which I prefer my own
builds rather than the ones from the distributed ports tree.  There
are several messages in the list archives on maintaining local ports
trees, e.g., Vivek Khera, `Making a local branch of the ports tree',
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2007-April/040366.html
If you need more help, you could ask here again.

If, OTOH, you are sure that there is no possibility of conflict
between the local patches and the ones in the distributed ports tree,
then putting your local patches, as has been suggested by others, in
`www/apache13/files' is an option.  See the Porter's Handbook, Section
4.4, for guidelines.

Raghavendra.

-- 
N. Raghavendra <raghu at mri.ernet.in> | http://www.retrotexts.net/
Harish-Chandra Research Institute   | http://www.mri.ernet.in/
See message headers for contact and OpenPGP information.