Bug 146578 – kernel-2 - allow patch level on tar patchset when strict order is on

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED NEEDINFO

[Description Alon Bar-Lev (RETIRED) 2006-09-06 09:27:41 UTC]

Hello,

I've tried to apply latest suspend2 patches into kernel, since it adds new files into kernel tree it added files using -p0 when it had to add files using -p1.

I've found that kernel-2 supports explicit patch level, but it was not supported on tar patchsets.
I understand that when strict patch order is not set, it is difficult to set the patch level. But when strict order is on, this is quite simple.

I've prepared a patch for this, I hope you accept it.

Regards,

[Comment 1 Alon Bar-Lev (RETIRED) 2006-09-06 09:30:19 UTC]

Created attachment 96185 [details, diff]
kernel-2.eclass.diff

[Comment 2 John Mylchreest (RETIRED) 2006-09-08 07:15:27 UTC]

Thank-you for this.

Can you please also look at unipatch-001.eclass and tell me if the problem still exists in the re-write?

I hoped to address everything in there, and if so we can look at moving to it sooner.

[Comment 3 Alon Bar-Lev (RETIRED) 2006-09-08 07:36:51 UTC]

Reading the code, it seems that it is OK.
What is using the eclass so I can check it out?

[Comment 4 Alon Bar-Lev (RETIRED) 2006-09-14 23:56:16 UTC]

(In reply to comment #3)
> Reading the code, it seems that it is OK.
> What is using the eclass so I can check it out?

[Comment 5 Daniel Drake (RETIRED) 2006-10-15 13:04:12 UTC]

Nothing uses that eclass at the moment. The plan is for the unipatch code to be dropped from kernel-2 and then kernel-2 would use unipatch. unipatch will then be usable by other projects too.

[Comment 6 Tom Wijsman (TomWij) (RETIRED) 2013-03-20 16:37:43 UTC]

(In reply to comment #3)
> Reading the code, it seems that it is OK.

But this bug is still open with all the contributing developers retired.

Is there still something that needs to happen here or is this RESOLVED FIXED?

[Comment 7 Alon Bar-Lev (RETIRED) 2013-03-20 16:43:38 UTC]

Well, I did not had this need for a long time, so I guess this can be closed as I guess nobody did actually need it, not sure that fixed though...

The intention to use unipatch was good...

[Comment 8 Tom Wijsman (TomWij) (RETIRED) 2013-08-19 10:06:49 UTC]

Makes me wonder if

> The plan is for the unipatch code to be dropped from kernel-2 and then kernel-2 would use unipatch. unipatch will then be usable by other projects too.

is still a need. Since 2006 I believe there have been improvements to eutils.eclass and epatch so this might no longer be necessary. Closing this as NEEDINFO so that if someone still has the need can add more details at a later point in time (or file a duplicate).