[Gnu-arch-users] Re: is ,,patchset need in library revisions?

[Pau Aliagas]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Tom Lord wrote:

> With the archive?  Yes, deliberately so.
> 
>     > For sparse revisions it has no meaning at all unless I calculated teh 
>     > patchset from the previous revision up to the built one.
> 
> Bzzt.   The ,,patch-set in revision X of the revlib should contain the
> changeset (if any) associated with revision X --- not a summary from
> the previous thing in the revlib.
> 
>     > I should build a ,,patchset from patch-n to patch-m. I dont' think it's 
>     > worh it, that's something that sould not be there.
> 
> No.   You should just stash the (uncompressed, untarred) changeset for
> patch-m there.

It's available as patch-4 in my archive:
archive name: address@hidden/tla--devo--1.1
location: http://arch.newtral.org

address@hidden tla]$ tla logs -s
base-0
    tag of address@hidden/tla--devo--1.1--patch-187
patch-1
    Add --hard-links option to get
patch-2
    Add --hard-links option to build-config
patch-3
    Rename --hard-links option to --link and -l in commands get and build-cfg
patch-4
    Implement full working version of sparse libraries

I'm for not keeping ,,patchset around. Look at what I leave now there: I 
don't really like it, it's the first patch of the list of patches I apply 
to obtain the selected revision.

Comments are welcome. I've checked it ad it looks ok.

Pau