On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Allan McRae <[email protected]> wrote: > Dan McGee wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Yun Zheng Hu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Replaced readlink -f / realpath with a more portable bash implementation. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yun Zheng Hu <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> >> >> Looks good, but: >> >> $ git am -3 -s < /tmp/repo-add-realpath.patch >> Applying: repo-add: bash implementation of realpath >> error: patch failed: scripts/repo-add.sh.in:326 >> error: scripts/repo-add.sh.in: patch does not apply >> Using index info to reconstruct a base tree... >> error: patch failed: scripts/repo-add.sh.in:326 >> error: scripts/repo-add.sh.in: patch does not apply >> Did you hand edit your patch? >> It does not apply to blobs recorded in its index. >> Cannot fall back to three-way merge. >> Patch failed at 0001. >> When you have resolved this problem run "git am -3 --resolved". >> If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am -3 --skip". >> To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am -3 --abort". >> >> Can you resubmit? I'm not sure if you actually hand-edited this, >> causing the sha1sum values to be off, but I'm curious why I've had two >> patches fail on me tonight when applying them. >> >> -Dan > > Did anyone provide differences in speed when using the bash "realpath" to > the actual binary one? My guess is that the speed difference will be > minimal, even when regenerating an entire repo db, but it would pay to > check.
I agree, especially after the speed differences Xavier pointed out with my other repo-add patch. -Dan _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
