From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git apply vs. renamed files index mismatch Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:53:41 -0700 Message-ID: <7vej3ucf6y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1220900995-11928-1-git-send-email-becky.bruce@freescale.com> <1220900995-11928-2-git-send-email-becky.bruce@freescale.com> <48C57A92.6060608@freescale.com> <20080908212717.GA21338@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Scott Wood , Becky Bruce , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, git@vger.kernel.org To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 09 02:55:09 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KcrVa-0004hZ-DH for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 02:55:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753811AbYIIAx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:53:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754224AbYIIAx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:53:58 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:50493 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753730AbYIIAx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:53:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A29679487; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:53:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4EC4379484; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:53:43 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20080908212717.GA21338@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (Anton Vorontsov's message of "Tue, 9 Sep 2008 01:27:17 +0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C7FFBFDA-7E09-11DD-A993-3113EBD4C077-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Anton Vorontsov writes: >>> 3 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 201 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/dma.c >>> delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c >> >> Passing -M to git format-patch makes it much easier > > I always thought that posting "-M" patches to the public lists is > discouraged since it is quite difficult to apply them via patch(1). > Also think of non-git users... My understanding has been that it is encouraged on the kernel mailing list, because the rename format is far easier to review by showing the differences that matter to reviewers, than showing a big chunk of text deleted and another big chunk of text that is similar added elsewhere. I won't comment on this any further; the use of it is strictly a list and community policy issue. > This is still possible by comparing the hashes: > ... > That is, if hashes match then it was pure rename. > > Though, too bad git {apply,am} does not produce any warnings if there > are any hidden changes... But I _do_ want to know what you mean by this comment. Your statement makes it sounds as if apply/am happily and silently accept "hidden changes" and it is a bad thing. Now what do you exactly mean by "any hidden changes"? Do you mean "the sender did not use renaming format, the patch you fed was a one that removes a huge chunk of text from one file, and adds a similarly huge chunk of text to another file. The changes to these files looked similar but was not quite the same"? It is all there for you to review, and especially if you prefer non-renaming format, then that is what you get. So I do not think that is what you are complaining about. It must be something else --- what is it?