On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 05:16:55PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:

> Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 04:44:21PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> >
> >> This command used to create a diff which can be consumed by patch. But
> >> at least with 2.9.3 it just gives a rename output:
> >> 
> >>  git format-patch \
> >>         --no-signature \
> >>         --stdout \
> >>         --break-rewrites \
> >>         --keep-subject \
> >>  
> >> 95fa0405c5991726e06c08ffcd8ff872f7fb4f2d^..95fa0405c5991726e06c08ffcd8ff872f7fb4f2d
> >> 
> >> 
> >> What must be done now to get a usable patch?
> >
> > Probably --no-renames.
> >
> > Renames were enabled by default by 5404c11 (diff: activate diff.renames
> > by default, 2016-02-25), which is in v2.9.0.
> >
> > I wonder if we should consider undoing that for format-patch, whose
> > output may be consumed by non-git endpoints.
> 
> I would say no (or more precisely: we should consider, but we should
> reject the idea ;-) ), since patches with renames are useful and can be used
> even outside Git's scope. GNU patch, which is probably the most widely
> used implementation of patch supports git-style renames since 2.7,
> released in September 2012.

Ah, OK; I didn't realize GNU patch had picked up rename support. I agree
that makes it less-bad for format-patch to start using them by default.
Olaf, what version of patch are you using?

-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to