On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 05:44:17PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: > On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 16:08, Libertas wrote: > > On 11/27/2014 07:38 AM, Raimo Niskanen wrote: > >> I have also learned to use the -C flag to patch... > > > > Have we ever considered changing the suggested shell commands in the > > patches to ensure that the patch will apply cleanly before trying? We > > could wrap the actual patch command an if-block with a 'patch -C' condition. > > There are few circumstances in which that would matter. The > expectation is that the patch should apply.
I do not remember from the output of patch if it printed at the bottom that some hunks were rejected. I kind of remember to have to scroll back quite far to find that out - which I did because the compilation failed. So if my vague memories are incorrect and patch indeed warns at the end of the run that some hunks in some file(s) were rejceted then all is well. Otherwise it might be nice to have "patch... || echo Warning" in the patch instruction, or a warning after all files from patch. > > Now, you are always welcome to run patch -C on your systems, but > otherwise it complicates the instructions and we'd prefer to keep them > simple. Yes. Observing the result from patch should be sufficient since it leaves backup and reject files behind so you can analyze and revert if want. -- / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
