On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 04:12:35PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@madism.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:45:14AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > >> Le Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 09:26:02AM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > >> > > >> > (filterdiff comes with patchutils.) Given that, this seems like a tempest > >> > in a teapot to me. Just convert the diff into whatever format the tool > >> > that you're using expects or the reviewer wants to read. > >> > >> Hi Russ and everybody, > >> > >> I already explained that I prefered that the patch stays in the original format > > > > Then you'll need to write your "own" patch system that calls patch(1) to > > apply the patches, à la cdbs-simple-patchsys. > > Why should he need to do that? If you'd had written "submit patches to > dpkg", I could get a meaning out of it, but here? He doesn't want to > diverge from upstream. Oh boy, are you even reading... That's a workaround to wait for dpkg to be fixed. If you're willing to fix dpkg, please go ahead, but Charles first try is clearly _not_ a proper fix, hence for now no such patch exists. -- Intersec <http://www.intersec.com> Pierre Habouzit <pierre.habouzit@intersec.com> Tél : +33 (0)1 5570 3346 Mob : +33 (0)6 1636 8131 Fax : +33 (0)1 5570 3332 37 Rue Pierre Lhomme 92400 Courbevoie
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature