On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:51:15PM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > s...@apache.org wrote on Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:05:15 -0000: > > Author: stsp > > Date: Wed Sep 15 10:05:14 2010 > > New Revision: 997249 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=997249&view=rev > > Log: > > Add an --old-patch-target-names option to svn patch. > > This option is useful in two cases: > > > > 1) A patch contains names like > > --- foo.c > > +++ foo.c.new > > and should be applied to foo.c. > > > > 2) A patch contains names like > > --- foo.c.orig > > +++ foo.c > > and should be applied in reverse to foo.c, e.g. to undo prior > > application > > of the patch. > > What happens if a user forgets to supply the new option? (Does svn > complain that 'foo.c.new is nonexistent/unversioned'?)
$ svn patch test.diff Skipped missing target: 'foo.new' Summary of conflicts: Skipped paths: 1 > For case (2): suppose I have such a patch (was emailed to me). I > applied it using 'svn patch $patchfile'. Now I want to unapply it; so > so I use 'svn patch --rd $patchfile' or 'svn patch --rd --optn $patchfile'? > AIUI, currently only the latter will work? Which one works depends on the way path names appear in the patch. Say you have a diff produced with svn diff. That will work with either combination of options. $ svn diff Index: alpha =================================================================== --- alpha (revision 2) +++ alpha (working copy) @@ -1 +1,2 @@ alpha +aaa You need the new option only to handle cases where people used e.g. the UNIX diff tool to create a patch using left/right names they made up while producing the diff. > Is the UI "'svn patch' always uses the filename in the /^+++/ line"? Yes. By default, that's the name that is used. If you reverse the diff, the filenames get swapped as well. So if you use the --optn option, the filenames get swapped again, or not at all, depending which way you look at it :) This UI may not be ideal, and I'm open for suggestions on how we could improve it. Maybe there's a way to handle this without user interaction, or a better name for the new option? The UNIX patch tool prompts for a filename when it cannot find a target. We could do the same, defining yet another prompt callback type. But I don't like the fact that UNIX patch does not do tab-completion in its prompt. I think the lack of tab-completion really affects usability. So if svn had a prompt for this, I'd like it to support tab-completion. So the new --optn option is an easier way to implement this. Maybe it's sufficient? Note that having the option around doesn't hurt even if we decide to implement prompting later. Stefan
