[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: Patch command execution

From: Jay Freeman \(saurik\) <saurik_at_saurik.com>
Date: 2002-02-07 21:26:13 CET

Before putting much more mental effort into this, someone should figure
out how CVS handles this (or does everyone other than me know how they
do it, thinks it is stupid, and never wants to speak of it again? hehe).
CVS doesn't mark conflicts on already existing changes, and can even
mark the fact that that occurred in its output during an update. This
was most of the reason I got annoyed at svn and filed the complaint for
not handling it in the first place (otherwise I might have never
realized such a thing was possible). CVS even makes modifications to
files to include both versions of changes and little header markers when
there is a conflict... do they have their own version of diff and patch
to accomplish this? I could have sworn CVS wasn't that complex. Is it
because they use some RCS tool, like the aforementioned "merge"?

Jay Freeman (saurik)

-----Original Message-----
From: Karl Fogel [mailto:kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 11:22 AM
To: Daniel Berlin
Cc: Garrett Rooney; dev@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Patch command execution

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

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.

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.

Here Endeth The Story Of Karl's Patch To Patch.


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

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.