Brian Waters has been collecting patches for the original w3c-server. He politely sent me a URL (http://www.bbin.com/~jbw/httpd.html) for his own updated version and I got some of his patches and integrated them to the port. Brian is a NetBSD user, but as soon as he is ready he will maintain our port. How-To-Repeat: Lot's of bug fixes and features from many sources coming in....
* Brian Waters has been collecting patches for the original w3c-server. He * politely sent me a URL (http://www.bbin.com/~jbw/httpd.html) for his * own updated version and I got some of his patches and integrated them * to the port. Brian is a NetBSD user, but as soon as he is ready he will * maintain our port. Are these patches available on the web? If so, you can just list them as PATCHFILES (see handbook for details). * diff -rNu /cdrom/ports/www/w3c-httpd/patches/CacheCheckSize.patch w3c-httpd/patches/CacheCheckSize.patch Besides, patches not named "patch-*" are going to be ignored by bsd.port.mk anyway. :) Satoshi
Satoshi Asami wrote: > Are these patches available on the web? If so, you can just list them > as PATCHFILES (see handbook for details). > They are available, but in different places, and one of them applied to a different directory so I had to edit it. Some are compressed and some are not. It was MUCH simpler to add the with the other patches. > * diff -rNu /cdrom/ports/www/w3c-httpd/patches/CacheCheckSize.patch w3c-httpd/patches/CacheCheckSize.patch > Besides, patches not named "patch-*" are going to be ignored by > bsd.port.mk anyway. :) > Ugh....I wanted to have them clearly labelled so the new port maintainer will identify them clearly. You're right, I thought the patches had been applied because the original package comes with some confusing *.orig files :(. Please close the PR, I have to rename the patches and check that at least the basic stuff still works. Pedro.
State Changed From-To: open->closed Closed at originator's request.
State Changed From-To: closed->feedback New version can be submitted as a followup to this one.
* They are available, but in different places, and one of them * applied to a different directory so I had to edit it. Some are * compressed and some are not. It was MUCH simpler to add the with * the other patches. Then, the only one that needs to be added is the one in a different directory. You can list multiple PATCH_SITES so they will all be grabbed. The decompression is handled on a per-file basis so it's not a problem to have compressed and uncompressed patchfiles. Given the above, I do not agree to put whole patchfiles (which are all quite large) in the repository. We are going to have the repository size explode if people start doing this when PATCHFILES can clearly handle them. :) * Please close the PR, I have to rename the patches and check that at * least the basic stuff still works. There's really no need to close the PR, you can just send the new version as an update to this PR (just like this message was). I put the PR in the "feebdack" state. Satoshi
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Patches were supplied in another PR (6945) which I will commit shortly.