Werner Detter <[email protected]> writes: >> For example, if 3.patch has not been forwarded upstream yet, then I >> would definitely modify it (instead of creating a new patch). > > I've modified 3.patch - in the course of the modification one line has > been deleted (perl "use" statement) as it's not needed anymore. > Therefore some subsequent patches now complain, e.g. > > Applying patch 4.patch > patching file xxx > Hunk #1 succeeded at 482 (offset -1 lines). > Hunk #2 succeeded at 2211 (offset -1 lines). > > Subsequent patches apply successfully but I'd like to get rid of > those messages. What is the recommendation here?
Have you got any reason not to simply refresh your patches? Something like: quilt pop -a; while quilt push; do quilt refresh; done -- Regards, Feri.
