From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@suse.de>
Cc: bug-patch@gnu.org,
"Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, "Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
"Jonathan Nieder" <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org,
"Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD" <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [bug-patch] Re: [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run,
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2010 22:01:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100904220152.GB20444@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201009042346.11787.agruen@suse.de>
On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 11:46:11PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Saturday 04 September 2010 23:45:27 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > It also makes them incompatible with GNU patch, whether or not GNU patch
> > understands the GIT headers.
>
> Aha? Then why do you think GNU patch tries to understand the GIt patch
> headers? So that it can be incompatible with GIT?
Read what you said last time around. "In this case, the patch itself is
broken."
So, because GNU patch doesn't understand the patch file, the patch file
must be broken? No, the patch file is fine with GIT which can apply it
correctly, but incompatible with GNU patch because of the way GNU patch
works (as you yourself said, GNU patch doesn't keep the intermediate
states.)
I repeat - if you want maximum compatibility, want GNU patch to be able
to apply the patch with or without --dry-run, then don't use -C or -M
when generating patches with git.
Simples.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-04 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-31 11:16 [RFC] [PATCH] arm & sh: factorised duplicated clkdev.c Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-01 9:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-01 11:13 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-01 23:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-02 2:37 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-02 2:42 ` Paul Mundt
2010-09-01 9:51 `
2010-09-01 11:18 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-01 15:01 `
2010-09-01 15:27 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-01 15:40 `
2010-09-01 23:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-02 5:46 `
2010-09-02 8:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-01 10:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-01 11:12 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-02 12:48 ` [RFC] [PATCH v2] " Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-02 13:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-02 13:26 `
2010-09-02 13:47 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-02 13:55 `
2010-09-02 13:39 ` [PATCH V3] " Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-03 10:18 ` Magnus Damm
2010-09-03 10:32 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-03 18:23 `
2010-09-03 18:43 ` [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: Jonathan Nieder
2010-09-03 19:29 ` [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-03 19:33 `
2010-09-03 19:45 ` [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: [PATCH V3] arm & sh: factoris Andreas Schwab
2010-09-04 0:03 ` [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-04 21:33 ` [bug-patch] Re: [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: [PATCH V3] ar Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-09-04 21:45 ` [bug-patch] Re: [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-09-04 21:46 ` [bug-patch] Re: [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: [PATCH V3] ar Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-09-04 22:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2010-09-04 22:26 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-09-03 19:34 ` [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: [PATCH V3] arm & sh: factoris Matthieu Moy
2010-09-03 22:58 ` [bug-patch] [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: [PATCH V3] arm & Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-09-03 23:32 ` [bug-patch] [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, Jonathan Nieder
2010-09-04 21:57 ` [bug-patch] [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, rejected without (Re: [PATCH V3] arm & Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-09-04 3:21 ` [bug-patch] [BUG?] rename patch accepted with --dry-run, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-09 9:53 ` [PATCH V3] arm & sh: factorised duplicated clkdev.c Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-09-14 7:59 ` Paul Mundt
2010-09-15 5:51 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2010-10-04 19:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100904220152.GB20444@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=agruen@suse.de \
--cc=bug-patch@gnu.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=plagnioj@jcrosoft.com \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).