On Sat, Jul 21, 2001 at 08:45:17AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, David Spreen wrote: > > the _linux_ source (the package description told me that he packaged > > _linux_ sources and not xu-sources) that the patch-package people still can > > apply their patches. > He notes his changes in README.Debian, and most kernel-patch packages will > work just fine against Xu's patched sources. Those that don't are usually > easy enough to fix. that file isn't include in the bin package also it only describe which patches are included, not what they really patch, so it is not possible to follow. > You will notice that most other distros do the same. RedHat and SuSE > distribute _heavily_ patched kernels, for example. Debian's is actually > quite light as far as patches go. but they also include vanilla kernelsources > > I don't think that every patch maintainer has to modify his patches to > > be compatible with the GNU/herbert kernel, right? > Wrong. They do. If it is too much of a bother for a maintainer, he should > orphan the package -- he doesn't care enough about that particular package > to maintain it IMHO. Do it right, and integrate it well with the rest of > Debian, or do not do it at all; again IMHO. the kernelpatch maintainer can only make their work if they can track the changes and see that they doesn't interfer with it patches. also this is almost impossible for security patches like openwall because they patch files near by the core. must we really include a kernel-source-upstream-* because one maintainer can't write changelog entries? bastian -- Men will always be men -- no matter where they are. -- Harry Mudd, "Mudd's Women", stardate 1329.8
Attachment:
pgphjv8a_unTw.pgp
Description: PGP signature