[PATCH] generic-build-script

Harold L Hunt II huntharo@msu.edu
Tue Jun 21 22:14:00 GMT 2005

Max Bowsher wrote:
> Of course, normally these are the same, but in my case they are not. 
> Therefore, the following patch changes all occurrences where ${BASEPKG} 
> is used in the second sense to ${PKG}-${VER}, so that ${BASEPKG} may be 
> redefined in my case.


My two cents:

Stick a comment above the definition for BASEPKG to explain the scenario 
where BASEPKG and PKG-VER will be different... otherwise you'll get 
dorks like me thinking that a patch reversing your patch would be 
useful, and such a thing must just slip in by accident.  Of course, the 
comment would also help maintainers figure out that this feature is 
present and that they can use it.

Since I've not written three times more words that would be in such a 
comment, I might as well give it a go:

# NOTE: BASEPKG is "name-version" of the upstream package.  Usually this
# is equal to ${PKG}-${VER}, except in the case where the Cygwin package
# name is different than the upstream package name (e.g. upstream:
# "foo-1.0" BASEPKG=foo-1.0, Cygwin package: "bar-1.0" PKG=bar VER=1.0).

Feel free to reword that.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list