3 ms·

Arch's policy is to minimize patches. I think the linux kernel runs on about 2-3 patches on average per release, most other packages aren't much more either. Th

by zaarn 6y ago

Arch's policy is to minimize patches. I think the linux kernel runs on about 2-3 patches on average per release, most other packages aren't much more either. The policy "minimal patches & close-to-default" is in my experience usually a great one to avoid package maintainer issues.

Foxboron 6y ago
We don't have any policy. Sticking with upstream is a shared value between the packagers but it's important to note that we generally don't enforce any policy. Most packages has no patches. Usually it's regressions or security patches if there is anything. Current linux release has one patch changing one default: https://github.com/archlinux/linux/commits/v5.9.8-arch1 https://github.com/archlinux/linux/commits/v5.9.8-arch1
- nemetroid 6y ago
  The wording on this page suggests that it is a policy: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Patching https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Patching As you say, the page notes that "[the] policy is intended to suggest, not to enforce", but having a policy is orthogonal to enforcing it.
  - Foxboron 6y ago
    And as a packager for Arch the past 3 years: I had no clue this page existed. Evidently we are bad at these policy things. But I'd rather call them social norms then packaging policies.
- zaarn 6y ago
  Even unspoken or badly specified policies can be policies. Just unwritten ones in that case. I thoroughly enjoy this one.
krzyk 6y ago
Or why are other packages patched? Is it because it takes long to accept them at upstream? But why is kernel is patched by distros at all? I run kernel from kernel.org always and don't see any issues.
- zaarn 6y ago
  On arch, patches are usually done to either customize the build version (the kernel is 5.9.xy-arch1 for example, that's the only patch), or to make them build with the newer compiler and libs present on the system. Additionally any patches necessary to make them work at all, though in my experience rare.

by zaarn 6y ago

Foxboron 6y ago

We don't have any policy. Sticking with upstream is a shared value between the packagers but it's important to note that we generally don't enforce any policy. Most packages has no patches. Usually it's regressions or security patches if there is anything. Current linux release has one patch changing one default: https://github.com/archlinux/linux/commits/v5.9.8-arch1 https://github.com/archlinux/linux/commits/v5.9.8-arch1

nemetroid 6y ago
The wording on this page suggests that it is a policy: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Patching https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Patching As you say, the page notes that "[the] policy is intended to suggest, not to enforce", but having a policy is orthogonal to enforcing it.
- Foxboron 6y ago
  And as a packager for Arch the past 3 years: I had no clue this page existed. Evidently we are bad at these policy things. But I'd rather call them social norms then packaging policies.
zaarn 6y ago
Even unspoken or badly specified policies can be policies. Just unwritten ones in that case. I thoroughly enjoy this one.

krzyk 6y ago

Or why are other packages patched? Is it because it takes long to accept them at upstream? But why is kernel is patched by distros at all? I run kernel from kernel.org always and don't see any issues.

zaarn 6y ago
On arch, patches are usually done to either customize the build version (the kernel is 5.9.xy-arch1 for example, that's the only patch), or to make them build with the newer compiler and libs present on the system. Additionally any patches necessary to make them work at all, though in my experience rare.