On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 08:28:42PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday, December 30, 2010 19:42:35 Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 07:04:25PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > epatch was changed to auto-skip the first path element when it is > > > absolute (starts with a slash). the reason was to avoid issues with > > > patches touching files outside of $PWD (which is bad if sandbox is > > > disabled). > > > > +1 from me, but can we have a QA prefix on the ewarn output? > > --- eutils.eclass 22 Nov 2010 00:31:03 -0000 1.352 > +++ eutils.eclass 31 Dec 2010 01:28:37 -0000 > @@ -360,6 +360,13 @@ epatch() { > count=1 > printf "NOTE: skipping -p0 due to absolute paths in > patch:\n%s\n" "${abs_paths}" >> "${STDERR_TARGET}" > fi > + # Similar reason, but with relative paths. > + local rel_paths=$(egrep -n '^[-+]{3} [^ ]*[.][.]/' > "${PATCH_TARGET}") > + if [[ -n ${rel_paths} ]] ; then > + eqawarn "QA Notice: Your patch has relative paths." > + eqawarn " In the future this will cause a failure." > + eqawarn "${rel_paths}" > + fi > > # Dynamically detect the correct -p# ... i'm lazy, so shoot me > :/ > while [[ ${count} -lt 5 ]] ; do > -mike
Mike, Maybe we should open a tracker to identify which packages use relative paths in their patches before making this control check fatal. Regards, -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410
pgphxSM73NFN6.pgp
Description: PGP signature