Bug#904302: Why outlawing vendor-specific patch series would be a bad idea
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 12:15:00AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> How should we handle architecture-specific patches properly inside
> Debian?
Why should there ever be architecture-specific patches?
I get that there sometimes need to be vendor-specific patches, because
defaults may differ between distributions. But why on earth should
defaults differ between architectures? That just makes no sense. Things
like uintXX_t and htonl() should take away most architecture-specific
differences, and then all that remains are things like ensuring
alignment is done right. You don't need patches for that; you need
bugfree code for that.
I think, however, that "changing the defaults to make sure it matches
the one for this vendor" should be done as part of the build, if at all.
Doing it as part of unpacking the source is just wrong. When I run
"dpkg-source -x", I expect it to behave as would "unzip" or "tar x". To
have it act differently depending on the environment in which it is run?
That's just perverse.
[...]
--
Could you people please use IRC like normal people?!?
-- Amaya Rodrigo Sastre, trying to quiet down the buzz in the DebConf 2008
Hacklab
Reply to: