X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 17:03:37 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: igor2 AT igor2priv To: "Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" X-Debug: to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu" From: gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu Subject: Re: patch testing, was Re: [geda-user] Repository Management was Re: developer excitement? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <559EFCF0 DOT 5040007 AT neurotica DOT com> <20150710081049 DOT GA13669 AT localhost DOT localdomain> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Fri, 10 Jul 2015, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 4:10 AM, Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) > [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 07:00:00PM -0400, Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >>> On 07/09/2015 06:35 PM, Svenn Are Bjerkem (svenn DOT bjerkem AT googlemail DOT com) >>> [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >>>> What is a good way to test out patches without having to garble up a >>>> clean install of the released geda? Try it out on a separate computer or >>>> a virtualbox? >>> >>> Oh good heavens no. Just use a different --prefix on your ./configure >>> command line. >> >> This doesn't solve the problem if you want a clean environment. >> Your config files would be still used. > > How much danger are people really in from a testing version of gEDA? > Are you guys worried about malware hiding in it or something? When I have this issue, my main concerns are: - a new version may require changes in config or rc files and that could ruin old versions - a new version may overwrite component/footprint library files that may break existing designs - a new version may have library dependencies that are incompatible with an old version For the first two a different installation path (prefix) is enough. When I hit the 3rd, I use chroot. My generic (not limited to geda) approach is that I have a semi-stable host system which typically lags 0.5 .. 2 years behind latest stuff. Then I have (or can easily set up) chroot with the latest-hottest-unstable stuff and I usually have a chroot with a much older system for cases when I need to revive bitrotten code. There's a minor hassle with chroot regarding to X, but that's easy to solve and I usually put it in a shell script that wraps chroot. Regards, Igor2