Re: is there a standard way to get the g-b-s to apply multiple patches?

[Eric Blake <ebb9 at byu dot net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

According to Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes on 1/11/2006 5:00 AM:
> I'm working on updating the fortune package and switching to use the
> generic build script, but I'd like to have the source package to have
> the original source, the current debian patches, and a separate patch
> file with my patches.  The debian package maintainer is also the
> maintainer of the upstream source, but he isn't updating that, just
> letting the debian patches get bigger and bigger over time.  I'd like
> my patches to be distinguishable from what's standard.

Take a look at bash and readline, where I distinguish between Chet Ramey's
official upstream patches vs. my cygwin-specific patches; the
bash-3.0-14.patch contains only my differences after the upstream patches
have been applied.  In particular, my modifications to g-b-s for bash
3.0-14 or readline 5.1-1 try to be pretty generic about bundling the
upstream patches.  If you find it useful, or have any improvements, then I
can consider making the patch robust enough to propose for g-b-s itself.

- --
Life is short - so eat dessert first!

Eric Blake             ebb9@byu.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDxQ2684KuGfSFAYARAmQ+AJ0dzgG9Vc4hNUdgKc6A5/wjgKKBUgCgqBOJ
vEpC2DVwcA6z7YL0wZe27eg=
=usDK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----