Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 24, 2005 at 07:50:18PM CEST, I got a letter
where Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > I wander what I should do with "cg-mkpatch" generated output; I had
> > > the impression that this should be usable with "cg-patch", but these
> > > are incompatible with each other.
> > They certainly aren't.
> Is this a problem with the current implementation, or intentional?
Implementation. Should be fixed now, after rewriting part of it. ;-)
> > The message is surely confusing, but appeared to be rather corner-casy
> > and after I imagined the required complexity of filtering this, I
> > decided to spend my time on something more useful for the time being. :)
> I don't think this is a corner case. I think it is pretty important
> to be able to promote permissiong changes.
Of course. By the corner case I meant "the external patch tool invoked
by cg-patch emits bogus error in case of patch containing only mode
changes and nothing else". I wasn't aware that the changes wouldn't
apply at all - actually, I was when I was writing the code, but
completely forgot about it later.
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching
someone. -- Alan Cox
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html