Raphael Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> writes: > Supporting multiple -pX would increase the complexity of the > associated code in a manner that is mostly incompatible with the > various checks that have always been built into dpkg-source (and > that were only applied on .diff). It's enough error-prone to mimick > the patch heuristics to identify the file to patch that I did not > want to have to support multiple -pX.
According to the Quilt documentation, the only levels that need to be accounted for are ‘-p0’ and ‘-p1’. That's more complexity, but at least it's not unbounded. > Furthermore, I believe that consistency is important and that we're > better with all patches formatted in the same way. Quilt make it > easy to refresh any patch to the expected format with "quilt refresh > -p1" (or -pab). I'm a complete neophyte at Quilt, and am using it only to apply patches that I've already created elsewhere. Can I expect ‘quilt refresh -p1’ to work if the patches were not created with Quilt? > Last point, IIRC, quilt/patch are able to handle patches really > formatted with -p1 but announced with -p0 (in the series file). I > didn't want to have to deal with such cornercases. Yet dpkg-source > has to be able to tell which files have been patched and it must be > able to check if they exist, and so on. I don't know enough about the situation you describe to understand, but I appreciate that a corner case like that sounds painful. > Feel free to try to write a patch to see the problems by yourself. I'm writing patches and trying to use them with ‘dpkg-source’, that's why I began this thread. -- \ “I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without | `\ hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd | _o__) never expect it.” —Jack Handey | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
