On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:41:20AM +0100, Roland Hieber wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 08:39:22AM -0500, Jon Ringle wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 4:32 AM Roland Hieber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > @@ -129,7 +144,7 @@ fi > > > GIT_EXTRA_ARGS="$GIT_EXTRA_ARGS --summary --stat=80" > > > > > > cat .ptxdist/series.0 > .ptxdist/series > > > -git format-patch -N $GIT_EXTRA_ARGS ${tagopt} -o .ptxdist/patches/ > > > ${range} | sed -e 's,^.ptxdist/patches/,,' > .ptxdist/series.auto > > > +${GIT} format-patch -N $GIT_EXTRA_ARGS ${tagopt} -o .ptxdist/patches/ > > > ${range} | sed -e 's,^.ptxdist/patches/,,' > .ptxdist/series.auto > > > > > > > In my own ptxdist git repo, I have a patch that adds `-M` to make file > > renames less verbose. Adding this should not affect the output of any patch > > series maintained by ptxdist. I needed it to make less verbose some package > > I was changing locally: > > git format-patch -M -N $GIT_EXTRA_ARGS ${tagopt} -o .ptxdist/patches/ > > ${range} | sed -e 's,^.ptxdist/patches/,,' > .ptxdist/series.auto > > Does this do the right thing then even when the patches are not applied > by git during the extract stage?
In any case, adding -M to format-patch is trying to solve a different problem than what I'm doing with my patch here, so it should be a separate patch. Any more comments on this patch? - Roland -- Roland Hieber, Pengutronix e.K. | [email protected] | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ ptxdist mailing list [email protected]
