[Pkg-kde-talk] KDE 3.4 package underway

[Pierre Habouzit]

--nextPart1687755.QSmhgghmMo
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline


>   The reason for uu-encoding branch patches is that we use diff -a
>   because sometimes there are updates to binary files, e.g. .png
> images. This works, but having .uu patches is not so nice, for a
> number of reasons.
>
>   I was thinking if we couldn't just make branch pulls with diff -Nru
>   only, so that we don't need to .uu encode them, and them grep the
> diff for ^Binary and do something with those files. Opinions?
>
>   Such "do something" could be, either do a diff -a for them, and
>   uu-encode only that patch, or what Daniel does: put them in a tar,
>   uuencode it, and ship that. In his clean target, he just removes
> the files, which afaik would make dpkg-source complain a little about
> "removed files" but nothing else.
>
>   Also, I'd like that we timestamp branch diffs, e.g.
>   01_kdelibs_branch_2005-02-27.diff. This was more useful when they
> were uuencoded, but I also like the approach even if they aren't. Is
> that ok?

for binary files, like png, since they do not have any post-treatments,=20
the simpler way IMHO, is to do sth like that :

debian/patches/01_kdelibs_branch_2005-02-27.diff that only contains=20
textual diffs.

and some debian/updates/01_kdelibs_branch_2005-02-27/ that contains the=20
updated binary files (png, and stuff like that).

then we only have to overwrite the files after they are installed, and=20
all is ok.

=2D-=20
=B7O=B7  Pierre Habouzit
=B7=B7O
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

--nextPart1687755.QSmhgghmMo
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCJk5WvGr7W6HudhwRApoCAKCF6LE9tRULej6/ZdjYszbmgMYynACfYjXP
D0dnQeaA+N1c+//SjYp5kh0=
=Eloo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1687755.QSmhgghmMo--