A beginner's overview to applying a patch (just because people have been asking)

[Mikerman]

Because many people have been asking how to apply patches recently, I offer this overview.  Note that the basic instructions for the various steps already are listed in the Rockbox Documentation (see the banner at left, and use the index); they are linked to below. Of great value is the Rockbox Simple Guide to Compiling (http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/SimpleGuideToCompiling), which should be your overall reference.

Most importantly, note that you have to apply a patch as against the Rockbox source code, not the already compiled code that you download at the Downloads page (the code that you simply unzip to install). In the end, then, you need to:

1. Download and set up a source code "compiler" (Cygwin, or as part of the VMWare environment), to compile the Rockbox source code that you download and then patch.  

Cygwin:

http://www.rockbox.org/tw...winInstallWithScreenShots
http://www.rockbox.org/tw...ew/Main/CygwinDevelopment

VMWare:

http://www.rockbox.org/tw...VMwareDevelopmentPlatform

2. Download the source code.

See the Simple Guide.

http://www.rockbox.org/tw...in/SimpleGuideToCompiling

3. Patch the source code.

See the Simple Guide (towards the middle of the instructions).

4. Compile the code.

See the Simple Guide.

http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/HowToCompile

This takes real time to do the first time (especially to set up the compiler). But it is much faster thereafter: if you originally used the SVN system to download the source code, just use the SVN source code update system (as explained in the Simple Guide, towards the end) to update your current (and patched, if applicable) version of the source code with the Rockbox source code revisions since your last download, and if there are no major changes affecting your patch(es), you don't have to re-patch; and then compile (hence, the great benefit of using the SVN system to begin with). If the code update conflicts with your patched version of the source code, see the Simple Guide for means by which to try to handle that, potentially manually (but eminently do-able--really!).

I hope this helps.

[Llorean]

Again: The forums are NOT for static information. They're for discussion. The wiki is for tutorials and other things.

Why not improve the SimpleGuideToCompiling page, or create a new wiki page for a patching tutorial?

I'll be removing this post in a couple days.

[Mikerman]

The reason I placed this here is because beginners are asked in the forums how to do patch, without getting to the Documentation to begin with (or really understanding what patching involves).  The "how-to" section here got a bit carried away, granted; I guess I really could have just said, see the Simple Guide, but that's static information in and of itself ...

[Llorean]

If people can't get to the documentation, they're not going to read other posts either, probably. If they searched posts, then they would surely see the many redirections to SimpleGuideToCompiling as it's brought up in nearly every post asking about patching.

[soap]

cough
coLinux

[Mikerman]

Thanks for your comments, Lorean.  Actually, people continually seems to have questions as to patching, thinking (it seems) that it can be done (easily--without compiling).  I was just trying to help.  And some people (perhaps newer users?) seem to find things easier in forums than elsewhere--maybe it's human nature, maybe its the search facility, maybe it's not searching the documentation.  Again, I just was trying to help them (and a poster who just had posted).



Ciao--

[Llorean]

Well, honestly, if they just seem to look in the forums first, they should learn sooner rather than later that static information is in the wiki. Otherwise there will be inconsistency, confusing them further.

So, as I said, it needs to be a wiki page if anything.

[Mikerman]

Well, had the thread to which I was attempting to respond not been locked (the new poster asking "How do I patch?" and being told to read the instructions but without any link), I just would have posted an answer there, and directing the poster to the various documentation. As it was, given the locked thread, I just got a "bit more descriptive" in the above.  My bad. Maybe it will help others.

I doubt that there's inconsistency with this, as it links to the various sources.  And it answers the basic question/issue, that patching requiring compiling.

[Llorean]

The inconsistency is that it's "documentation", but the forums are not for documentation.

Users need to be told at the first opportunity, if it's clear they don't know, that the forums are for dicussion, and that documentation should be sought elsewhere. This means there shouldn't be documentation in the forums, if at all possible.

[Rincewind]

Maybe this can be posted in the sticky topic in the Getting startet with Compiling forum?

The information is very general, so it is not likely that it will be out of date soon. I know that people will keep asking these questions, no matter what is done, but if 5% of users read the sticky first, then it helps.
I think Mikerman's post is clearly written and useful for this purpose.

[LinusN]

What is it with people and forums nowadays? What on earth is wrong with using the "documentation" section on rockbox.org for documentation (i.e the Wiki)?

[Mikerman]

Again, my original intent simply had been to assist the new poster who asked, "How do I patch?," by telling him that it's not as simple as "running" a patch and by directing him to where to go/look, but that thread had been locked down, apparently.  Hence, my separate thread.  And then I got a bit carried away with trying to be helpful (and by rounding out the various instruction sets some).

[Llorean]

If those five percent don't look in the wiki they need to read the forum rules. Documentation belongs in the wiki. I will not make an exception on the grounds that people ignore the rules. No sticky for this or any tutorial. The only people it helps are those who cannot be bothered to follow the rules. Can you explain to me why I should help people who click that they agree to our rules and them choose to ignore them?

[LinusN]

Again, my original intent simply had been to assist the new poster who asked, "How do I patch?," by telling him that it's not as simple as "running" a patch and by directing him to where to go/look, but that thread had been locked down, apparently.  Hence, my separate thread.  And then I got a bit carried away with trying to be helpful (and by rounding out the various instruction sets some).

Mikerman,

Please do understand that I appreciate your effort to document this for the n00bs. I was not referring to your specific post, but it was more a cry of general frustration over the ever growing (ab)use of stickies in forums (not just Rockbox) for documentation.

[Mikerman]

Thanks, Linus.  And Llorean, I absolutely don't have any issue with this thread not being "sticky-fied"--that never was my goal/request (and this thread actually has become something that it certainly, umm, never was intended to be ...).  

As to people not doing what they're supposed to (search for answers and read the documentation), well, I guess that proves that people just do at times what they do   ; personally, I think that always has to be taken into account (and why I was at work until 10:30 at night last night with a client).  Also that it just is harder, at times, to find things, especially when one is new, I think.  (Personally, I find searching here somewhat harder than at some other boards; maybe it's the nature of discussion here.)  Not condoning any of this, but saying what seems to be the case--I see it at other boards as well, with people posting a question at a forum rather than looking for an answer (sometimes only needing to do so for a minute to find one).  Sometimes I'll respond with, Read the manual; sometimes with nothing; and sometimes with an explanation, as I tried here.  And at times, for me at least, redundancy can be good, as it increases the chances of a hit when doing a search, or of multiple hits and understanding the answer or different solutions.  

At times, with all due respect, I think some people forget that they are so far above many of us in tech. matters that they don't recognize that the shorthand that is used to explain matters leaves some of us scratching our heads.  (Many of us try to hide that ...)  The forums can be helpful in that regard.

I dunno.  Maybe a "New user" discussion forum for questions would be helpful, so that the general boards are free from "clutter."  Although there could be a fear by new people that no one who knows answers would look there; and it segments things more.  Personally, I'll take help wherever I can find it.

edit:  And I just learned something:  when I originally tried to post this message, got the warning, "You can add 1 smilies per post. Remove some smileys and try again."