Opened 21 years ago
Closed 20 years ago
#461 closed defect (fixed)
Roll some patches back to being sed's
| Reported by: | Owned by: | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | Book | Version: | CVS |
| Severity: | normal | Keywords: | |
| Cc: |
Description
After discussing on lfs-dev I've come to agree that some of the patches are best to be sed's, especially when it concerns simple s/foo/bar/ statements.
The following patches are good candidates to be sed's again:
- Gawk patch
- Glibc Root/Perl patch
- Kbd patch
- Man Manpath patch
- Man Pager patch
- Sh-utils Hostname patch
Please note: good candidates. Make a sed, make it look readable. If it looks too complicated or too ugly, don't do it.
Attachments (2)
Change History (9)
comment:1 by , 21 years ago
| Priority: | high → highest |
|---|
by , 21 years ago
| Attachment: | gawksed.patch added |
|---|
by , 21 years ago
| Attachment: | glibcsed.patch added |
|---|
roll back glibc root and perl patch to sed commands.
comment:2 by , 21 years ago
| Priority: | highest → normal |
|---|
comment:3 by , 20 years ago
I'm having second thoughts on this. Especially now with the patches project in existence, wouldn't we better serve the community keeping things as patches as much as possible? Much easier for people to browse the patches project than reading ever package installation in the book to see if we make any modifications to a package.
Along that same thought that would mean our sed to sysvinit should be turned into a patch as well?
comment:4 by , 20 years ago
I would be selective about this. We want to leave a few seds of various styles because the exposure offers some educational value. My though is that packages that have a history of relatively frequent change and constantly require *minor* patches would be candidates to leave as seds. Those with less activity and/or tendancy to more complex patching needs could be kept as patches.
The result I would look for would be a reasonable amount of exposure to sed combined with a slight reduction in patch-maintenance workload.
comment:5 by , 20 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|
The rough consensus on the list was to use sed's where a simple one-liner will achieve the goal. When the sed starts to get complex and is likely to induce typos and/or span multiple lines then use a patch instead.
Looking at the current crop, there are a few candidates. The Manpath and Pager patches for Man being the most obvious. And also possibly the Grub Gcc33 and Gcc Suppress-Libiberty patches.
comment:6 by , 20 years ago
| Status: | new → assigned |
|---|
comment:7 by , 20 years ago
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → closed |
Fixes committed for those 4 patches mentioned previously. Closing.
roll back chapter 6 gawk patch to sed commands.