Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> Do the resulting patches still work the same with patch(1)?
Daniel Rall wrote:
> I like the additional information, though I'm a little unsure about
> the format. Can you still paste this into most 'patch' tools? I
> think GNU patch should work. I'm not sure about Solaris patch, etc.
First of all I don't think that anyone will take a message from
mailer.py, extract the patch information and then apply it to some
files. Why should someone do that? It's obviously much easier to get
the diff with 'svn diff' - or just say 'svn up'. IMHO we only use the
unified diff format because people are used to read it.
Second, if you look at today's output, copied files are shown as
--- file1 (original)
+++ file2 Sun Sep 9 07:20:00 2001
If you give this to patch, patch will patch file1 and not generate a
new file file2! So in case of copied files it doesn't work today
either.
Third, I tested the new diffs.
On cygwin (patch 2.5.8) copied files didn't work (see above) and
deleted files result in a 0 byte file. It's all the same behaviour
compared to today's diff format.
On Solaris 5.9 (patch doesn't show any version number) copied files
didn't work (see above), deleted files result in a 0 byte file and
patch doesn't create the new file with the 'add diff', but it's also
the same behaviour compared to today's diff format.
Mathias
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 14 12:38:54 2006