Re: Any tips for moving to 1.5.9? Which patches have already been applied?
* On 2005.03.18, in <20050319021253.GF20041@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
* "Mun Johl" <mun_johl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> was just wondering how folks are handling that situation? Do you just
> apply each patch and fix the problems one by one? It doesn't appear as
Pretty much. :/
Most patches aren't too much trouble if you maintain them at each
version change, but some 1.3.x patches certainly could be. It's a lot
of work either way, when you add it all up, and I'm not sure I can
recommend any good strategies besides trying not to get excited about
patches.
> if all of the legacy patches have been ported to a recent version of
> mutt so that could be a non-trivial task (for me).
If they're not your own patches, then certainly you should ask whether
anyone else has done this work for you. It might already be updated by
someone else, and you just don't know it.
> Also, is there a way for me to find out which patches have in fact been
> applied to the release? Some of the patches I apply may of already been
> incorporated, but I'm not sure how to figure that out.
This isn't very helpful, but a patch that's been applied to CVS is going
to fail pretty much every hunk. Most other patches will succeed on at
least a few. So when you get failure after failure on a single patch
(not your mega-patch), that's a good sign that you should examine the
code and see whether patches lines are present.
> Sorry for the novice questions.
Not at all. Patching is a sordid business, and there's not really a good
system for managing them.
--
-D. dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx NSIT::ENSS
"So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill...
and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water
mark -- the place where the wave finally broke and rolled back." -HST