popt and patch policy

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Wed Apr 5 09:42:35 PDT 2006

Archaic wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 10:11:51AM -0600, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
>> Been there:)
>> http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/blfs-dev/2006-January/013009.html
> Bruce, looking at that thread and this current one, I simply cannot find
> a valid reason for keeping the debian patch around and I certainly can't
> find reason we should be using debian's versioning scheme. This is all
> assuming we stay at 1.7. I do not (and likely will not) have sufficient
> evidence to say that 1.10.x is compatible, but for 1.7, a sed or tiny
> patch to popt.c is sufficient. That and stripping the hideous -5 from
> the version number.

Did you see my post yesterday?

"OK, if it isn't doing anything for us, then we don't need to use it,
but I think we need to say why we aren't using the "latest" version.

I just saw Dan's comment and that makes this discussion moot as far as
popt goes."

  -- Bruce

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list