From: Andreas Gruenbacher Organization: SuSE Linux AG To: Andrew Morton Subject: Patch scripts 0.9 improvements Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 14:39:16 +0100 Hi Andrew, I still find your patch management scripts very useful. There are a fewg small limitations that still keeps me from using them for the SuSEg kernel at the moment. Particularly I need a way to have sub-directoriesg in patches/ etc. Please find some improvements and ideas in the attached patch. Also I think it would be a good idea to keep all (non-temporary)g information pertaining to a patch in a single file, rather thang splitting into .patch, .txt, .pc files. I have a format like theg following in mind. A simple parser for that proposed format is alsog attached. Summary: Test patch Author: Andreas Gruenbacher URL: http://www.suse.de/ %description DESCRIPTION %files FILE1 FILE2 FILE3 %patch PATCH I think that it doesn't make much sense to keep the .pc files (%filesg section) as part of the patch set; they can easily be regenerated fromg the .patch files. They are useful while working on a set of patchesg though. What do you think of always generating them on the fly, insteadg of using import_patch? Then the patches and series files could beg checked out from CVS, and patching could start immediately; no cruftg would assemble in the .pc files. Another idea: Maybe all the *~* files could live in their own directoryg tree, e.g., under pc/? Then the file names would become more simple,g e.g., from file.x~patch to ps/patch/file.x and file.x~dir_patch tog dir/patch/file.x, with a smaller chance of clashes. What do you think of that? Cheers, Andreas. [ Attachments removed ]