On Friday 10 October 2008 17:27:00 Chris Snook wrote:
Dave Jones wrote:
> For a while, diffs in the Fedora kernel have followed the form
>
> linux-2.6-*.patch
>
> Then, we started seeing some git snapshots show up as
>
> git-*.diff
>
> and lately, everything seems to have gone bananas, with no
> particular scheme at all..
>
> nvidia-agp.patch, percpu_counter_sum_cleanup.patch, xfs-barrier-fix.patch
> etc etc.
>
> Maybe I'm being overly anal. The linux-2.6- prefix is kind of pointless
> (given that duh, they're all going to be against Linux 2.6), but it
> does group things nicely in an ls output if nothing else.
>
> So, what are peoples thoughts on this?
>
> Dave
If we'd prefix them with the source package name, in this case "kernel",
it
would make it a lot easier to find things in /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES when
we've got SRPMs from different packages installed. We should probably
avoid using names that refer to a specific upstream version, because the
name becomes misleading once we rebase. When there's a suitable upstream
patch name, like the names Andrew Morton uses in -mm, we should probably
use those (perhaps prepended with kernel-) to make it clear what it
corresponds to upstream.
Yeah, I'd be happy with <pkgname>-<tree id>-<description>.patch,
omitting the
tree id portion if there isn't one, or some variant thereof. Being able to do
an 'ls kernel*.patch' is definitely useful.
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod(a)redhat.com