A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

[Aleksander Alekseev]

Hello.

When I do `git format-patch` I get something like this:

```
 Documentation/kselftest.txt | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/kselftest.txt b/Documentation/kselftest.txt
index 979eaca..54bee77 100644
(SNIP)
```

Note an empty line between statistics and patch itself. Judging by
lkml.org _everyone_ removes this empty line. So my question is --- is
there really such a requirement for formatting a patch or it's just
something that depends on git version?

-- 
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:46:30PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> When I do `git format-patch` I get something like this:
> 
> ```
>  Documentation/kselftest.txt | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/kselftest.txt b/Documentation/kselftest.txt
> index 979eaca..54bee77 100644
> (SNIP)
> ```
> 
> Note an empty line between statistics and patch itself. Judging by
> lkml.org _everyone_ removes this empty line. So my question is --- is
> there really such a requirement for formatting a patch or it's just
> something that depends on git version?

I don't see anyone removing that line, perhaps you aren't looking at the
patch properly in an email client?

Leave it in there, it's good to have.

thanks,

greg k-h

A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

[Aleksander Alekseev]

> I don't see anyone removing that line, perhaps you aren't looking at
> the patch properly in an email client?
> 
> Leave it in there, it's good to have.

There is way too much traffic in LMKL for me to read it with e-mail
client. This is why I'm using lkml.org. Here are just a few random
patches that were sent today:

* https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/160
* https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/155
* https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/131
* https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/123
* https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/120
* https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/98

No empty lines. Maybe in fact there are empty lines but lkml.org
removed them? 

-- 
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 01:08:43PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> > I don't see anyone removing that line, perhaps you aren't looking at
> > the patch properly in an email client?
> > 
> > Leave it in there, it's good to have.
> 
> There is way too much traffic in LMKL for me to read it with e-mail
> client. This is why I'm using lkml.org. Here are just a few random
> patches that were sent today:
> 
> * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/160
> * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/155
> * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/131
> * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/123
> * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/120
> * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/98
> 
> No empty lines. Maybe in fact there are empty lines but lkml.org
> removed them? 

Yup, it looks that way, the above patches all have that line in them
when I look at the real emails.

I recommend using a real email client when dealing with patches, allmost
all web interfaces will mess them up.

greg k-h

A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

[John Koepi]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 01:08:43PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> > > I don't see anyone removing that line, perhaps you aren't looking at
> > > the patch properly in an email client?
> > >
> > > Leave it in there, it's good to have.
> >
> > There is way too much traffic in LMKL for me to read it with e-mail
> > client. This is why I'm using lkml.org. Here are just a few random
> > patches that were sent today:
> >
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/160
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/155
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/131
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/123
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/120
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/98
> >
> > No empty lines. Maybe in fact there are empty lines but lkml.org
> > removed them?
>
> Yup, it looks that way, the above patches all have that line in them
> when I look at the real emails.
>
> I recommend using a real email client when dealing with patches, allmost
> all web interfaces will mess them up.
>

It looks like usual text to html formatting issue. System tend to replace
\n with <br />, yet fails somewhere chewing an empty line.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20160818/e010fa4d/attachment.html