| Summary: | net-wireless/wpa_supplicant: add epatch_user support | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | charles17 |
| Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Bjarke Istrup Pedersen (RETIRED) <gurligebis> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | zerochaos |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
|
Description
charles17
2015-05-11 12:28:03 UTC
Just curious, what's the reasoning behind the request? (In reply to NP-Hardass from comment #1) > Just curious, what's the reasoning behind the request? epatch_user is very common to many packages. Having it in the ebuild would simply avoid the need for putting the /etc/portage/bashrc stuff as described on https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//etc/portage/patches#Enabling_.2Fetc.2Fportage.2Fpatches_for_all_ebuilds in case a user wants to use patches from http://w1.fi/security/ which are not yet in the tree or if a user wants to use his/her own patches. I haven't looked at epatch_user yet, but it might be an idea, as long as it is possible to show a big, fat warning telling the user, that they should be able to reproduce the issue without user patches before reporting them. It is going to be a nightmare to debug issues caused by a users own patches :-) (In reply to charles17 from comment #2) > epatch_user is very common to many packages. Having it in the ebuild would > simply avoid the need for putting the /etc/portage/bashrc stuff as described > on > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//etc/portage/patches#Enabling_.2Fetc.2Fportage. > 2Fpatches_for_all_ebuilds in case a user wants to use patches from > http://w1.fi/security/ which are not yet in the tree or if a user wants to > use his/her own patches. Yeah, I am aware of what it is. I was just having trouble thinking of a use case of why this package would be likely to have users applying patches. Regarding the link that you submitted of security patches, I think those would be better handled by Gentoo and the maintainers as security bugs, but that is just my opinion. (In reply to Bjarke Istrup Pedersen from comment #3) > I haven't looked at epatch_user yet, but it might be an idea, as long as it > is possible to show a big, fat warning telling the user, that they should be > able to reproduce the issue without user patches before reporting them. > > It is going to be a nightmare to debug issues caused by a users own patches > :-) The build.log should note that user patches were applied. Even has a nice internal function name for the inclusion of the warning "epatch_user_death_notice" which ewarns "!!! User patches were applied to this build!" so I think you'll be okay on that front if you decide to add the support. Okay, so the use-case is adding security patches when they arrive, I'm not going to do this - sorry. If any new security patches are released, please submit bug report about this instead, so we can get them implemented. I much better like the idea of people submitting the patches they have, so we all can benefit from it. |
