Hello community, here is the log from the commit of package patch for openSUSE:Factory checked in at 2014-11-24 11:08:00 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Comparing /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/patch (Old) and /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/.patch.new (New) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Package is "patch" Changes: -------- --- /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/patch/patch.changes 2014-06-18 22:04:31.000000000 +0200 +++ /work/SRC/openSUSE:Factory/.patch.new/patch.changes 2014-11-24 11:08:01.000000000 +0100 @@ -1,0 +2,8 @@ +Mon Nov 10 11:37:03 CET 2014 - [email protected] + +- reject-print-function-01-drop-useless-test.patch: Drop useless + test in another_hunk(). +- reject-print-function-02-handle-unified-format.patch: Preserve C + function name in unified rejects (bnc#904519). + +------------------------------------------------------------------- New: ---- reject-print-function-01-drop-useless-test.patch reject-print-function-02-handle-unified-format.patch ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Other differences: ------------------ ++++++ patch.spec ++++++ --- /var/tmp/diff_new_pack.yFvBAh/_old 2014-11-24 11:08:02.000000000 +0100 +++ /var/tmp/diff_new_pack.yFvBAh/_new 2014-11-24 11:08:02.000000000 +0100 @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ Group: Productivity/Text/Utilities Source: http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/patch/patch-%version.tar.bz2 Patch: error-report-crash.patch +Patch1: reject-print-function-01-drop-useless-test.patch +Patch2: reject-print-function-02-handle-unified-format.patch BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-build %description @@ -45,6 +47,8 @@ %prep %setup -q %patch -p1 +%patch1 -p1 +%patch2 -p1 %build export CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -Wall -O2 -pipe" ++++++ reject-print-function-01-drop-useless-test.patch ++++++ From: Jean Delvare <[email protected]> Subject: Drop useless test in another_hunk() Upstream: Committed (65193f1cc1bf38bdd63d1f3087b0d7e16ad3f082) This test will always succeed so it is either broken or useless. The equivalent code path for context patches doesn't have this test so I suppose it's OK to just remove it. --- src/pch.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/src/pch.c +++ b/src/pch.c @@ -1651,7 +1651,7 @@ another_hunk (enum diff difftype, bool r if (*s == ' ') s++; if (*s++ != '@') malformed (); - if (*s++ == '@' && *s == ' ' && *s != '\0') + if (*s++ == '@' && *s == ' ') { p_c_function = s; while (*s != '\n') ++++++ reject-print-function-02-handle-unified-format.patch ++++++ From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> Subject: Preserve function names in reject files Upstream: Committed (a2f4bfe0f3f54181a8f1077cde9ebef0b4f891c0) References: bnc#904519 * src/patch.c (main): Preserve function names in reject files. * tests/reject-format: Update the test case. --- src/patch.c | 3 ++- tests/reject-format | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) --- a/src/patch.c +++ b/src/patch.c @@ -1237,6 +1237,7 @@ abort_hunk_unified (bool header, bool re lin old = 1; lin lastline = pch_ptrn_lines (); lin new = lastline + 1; + char const *c_function = pch_c_function(); if (header) { @@ -1251,7 +1252,7 @@ abort_hunk_unified (bool header, bool re print_unidiff_range (rejfp, pch_first () + out_offset, lastline); fprintf (rejfp, " +"); print_unidiff_range (rejfp, pch_newfirst () + out_offset, pch_repl_lines ()); - fprintf (rejfp, " @@\n"); + fprintf (rejfp, " @@%s\n", c_function ? c_function : ""); while (pch_char (new) == '=' || pch_char (new) == '\n') new++; --- a/tests/reject-format +++ b/tests/reject-format @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ check 'cat f.rej' <<EOF Index: f --- f.orig +++ f -@@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ +@@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ a() { 2 3 $preserve_trailing_blank @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ EOF check 'cat f.rej' <<EOF --- f.orig +++ f -@@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ +@@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ a() { 2 3 $preserve_trailing_blank -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
