Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:39:05 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: The evils of Makefile-embedded perl scripts vs patches Message-ID: <58526.997875545@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:31:00 %2B0200." <58425.997875060@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Was Re: Re: cvs commit: ports/games/freeciv ...] On Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:31:00 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > What's wrong with it is that the Makefile isn't a place that folks > expect to find patches. People expect to find patches in the files > directory, names patch-*. Properly stored patches are also easier to > submit back to the vendor. Also, embedded perl scripts tend not to error out on failure to find a match. This means it's far too easy for the perl script to become stale. This was a perfect example. The perl script did absolutely _nothing_ useful any more. A patch file would have failed to apply, which would help the maintainer keep things tidy. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?58526.997875545>