Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>
> On 12.03.2004 13:01, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> >>I thought that previously all xpatches for all blocks were
> executed in
> >>one go instead of separately and respecting dependency order.
> >
> > No, one patch after the other was applied previously. The
> order of the
> > dependencies was used to define the order of the patches to be
> > applied.
> > So, if the dependencies were correctly set, no problem could occur.
>
> Where do you take this from?
Because I did it :)
>From what I see at [1] there was
> exactly one patch-conf target, for the dependencies we would
> need one target for every cocoon block. Or do I miss something?
>
Actually, I don't know anymore...I only know before I change that,
the dependencies weren't preserved, with the changes it worked
very well.
But that's the past anyway :)
Carsten
|