Which is best?

Aleksandar Kuktin akuktin at gmail.com
Tue Nov 16 15:14:52 PST 2010

>On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:00:49 -0600
>Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:51:54AM -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> >>  If there are no replies (I'm sure
> >> Ken will have an opinion), then we'll go with Bruce's suggestion.
> >>
> >  FWIW, for this I think smaller is better.
> Just to add another thought here, if a user wants to actually look at 
> the changes instead of just blindly applying patches and building, a 
> large patch, especially one of generated code, would be difficult or 
> impossible to comprehend.  A small patch like you just posted is very 
> clear as to exactly what is being changed.
>    -- Bruce

One other thing: If one uses an automated build method, he (myself) may
be disinclined to mess with the $PATH variable. This is regarding DJ's
"third patch" idea.
Besides, the autostuff should be regarded as a vital part of the system
and care should be taken that it always works properly.

-Aleksandar Kuktin

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list