On 19 Mar 2010, at 14:40, Domingo Alvarez Duarte wrote: > MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK) wrote: >> -u old_file new_file> changes.patch > > Every day is a day to learn something ! > > Thanks a lot for the explanation, and here it has: > > diff -u G:\tmp\c\fltk-svn\FL\Fl.H Fl.H > Fl.H.patch > diff -u G:\tmp\c\fltk-svn\src\Fl.cxx Fl.cxx >
Thanks Domingo - they look better. Note, for the record, that is is *possible* to tell patch to accept "reversed" patches, or patches in the "non-unified" style and so forth, but it is generally better to get things done in the "standard" style. Also, if people are examining the patches, unified diffs are usually easier to interpret, certainly for small localised changes like these. All - these patches look OK to me, so I others agree, I can probably apply them. I think we are maybe a few votes short of quorate, so if somebody could give them a quick scan and shout out yay or nay... _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
