Hi! On Fri, 2026-02-06 at 13:22:51 +0000, Simon McVittie wrote: > Control: tags -1 + patch > > I was reminded of this by an indented diff similar to my GTK example > accidentally getting into Debian's i3 package recently > (https://bugs.debian.org/1126992). See also > https://bugs.debian.org/1081436 in which I suggested that `gbp pq > export` could avoid this indented-diff-in-commit-message pattern. > > On Sun, 02 Mar 2025 at 08:59:58 +0000, Tj wrote: > > Seeking beyond the patch header before spawning the system patch tool solves > > this in all my local testing, including using Simon's example patch that > > triggered this. > > This seems like quite an elegant solution to this - if dpkg is > already aware of the boundary between header and patch, it adds very > little new code to be able to do this.
Sorry, was meaning to comment on this at the time but it seems I missed doing that. > Guillem, would you be willing to consider Tj's patch? At least for > unstable? While I agree the patch in itself is pretty elegant in the dpkg context, there is still the problem that this would hide the underlying deficiencies with patch(1) not handling this correctly, where I'm assuming things like quilt would be problematic anyway. (Unless quilt it is also already stripping the header?) And even besides quilt, I'm not sure what else might be using patch(1) directly to apply things. :/ Thanks, Guillem
