Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-30 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:27:31 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch linear? If it contains merge commits, then git format-patch / git am isn't guaranteed

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-30 Thread Rich Freeman
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote: On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:27:31 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch

[gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Rich Freeman
I figure this is half-on-topic for this list since I'm trying to prepare patch sets for a package. I'm getting fairly bizarre behavior from git format-patch - patches that don't apply, and patches numbered early in sequence that didn't show up previously in this branch. I suspect rebasing might

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: I figure this is half-on-topic for this list since I'm trying to prepare patch sets for a package. I'm getting fairly bizarre behavior from git format-patch - patches that don't apply, and patches numbered early in sequence

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Final output is: can't find file to patch at input line 17 (messing with -p doesn't help, which will be obvious from a quick inspection of the file vs

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Final output is: can't find file to patch at input line 17 (messing with -p

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Rich Freeman wrote: git clone https://github.com/MythTV/mythtv.git -b fixes/0.26 cd mythtv/ git format-patch v0.26.0 mv *.patch .. git checkout v0.26.0 patch -p0 ../0001-* Final output is: can't find file to patch at input line 17 (messing with -p doesn't help,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch linear? If it contains merge commits, then git format-patch / git am isn't guaranteed to work. There are branches. There is obviously /A/ linear path from the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Odd git format-patch behavior

2013-07-29 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: I still find it odd that some are able to apply that patch. I just tried again with git 1.8.3.2 and got the same behavior. If others are getting a patch that applies then there is something bizarre going on. I get a