On 7 Feb 2002, Karl Fogel wrote:
> Daniel Berlin <dan@dberlin.org> writes:
> > I could rewrite that code in patch to do what we want, if we are
> > willing to distribute our own version of patch.
> >
> > It actually sets a stupid flag in the code named "skip_rest_of_patch".
> > It's about a 10 line change, maximum (Theoretically a 1 line change,
> > but there might be other stupidity down the line).
>
> I think distributing our own patch would be more trouble than its
> worth.
That's the whole problem.
>
> But, if you can get such a change merged into the mainline patch, then
> we could simply require "GNU Patch v. 2.6" or whatever the new version
> would be.
Patch 2002?
>
> This may be hard, though. I'm not sure what the state of `patch'
> maintenance is. I sent in a patch to patch once, and everyone who
> responded seemed to think it a good idea (Paul Eggert even rewrote it
> to be better), but no one seemed to feel they were the one to decide
> that it should go into the mainline. As far as I know, it's still out
> there in limbo; no new patch release has been made for a long time.
1995 to be exact.
Thus, I doubt it'll ever happen.
>
> Here Endeth The Story Of Karl's Patch To Patch.
>
> -K
>
> P.S. Branko, both capitalization schemes are acceptable in titles and
> heading lines, because I say so. :-)
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:37:05 2006