TL;DR -- git apply --reject implies verbose, but the similar
git apply --check does not, which seems inconsistent.
Background: A common (non-git) workflow can be to use patch --dry-run
to inspect whether a patch is feasible, and then use patch again
a 2nd time (w/o --dry-run) to actually apply
On 13-08-20 01:57 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
TL;DR -- git apply --reject implies verbose, but the similar
git apply --check does not, which seems inconsistent.
Hmmm, I am of two minds. From purely idealistic point of view, I
can see why
On 13-08-20 02:51 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Hi Paul,
Paul Gortmaker wrote:
OK, so given your feedback, how do you feel about a patch to the
documentation that indicates to use -v in combination with the
--check to get equivalent patch --dry-run behaviour?
Sounds like a good idea to me
On 13-08-20 03:54 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 12:45:03 -0700
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org writes:
I do not think it is necessarily a good idea to assume that people
who are learning git apply know how GNU patch works.
Linus
the patch to do the manual fixup before eventually
continuing with git add ... ; git am -r.
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com
diff --git a/git-am.sh b/git-am.sh
index f8b7a0c..32e6ac0 100755
--- a/git-am.sh
+++ b/git-am.sh
@@ -854,7 +854,10 @@ did you forget to use 'git add
On 12-07-12 01:45 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
If git am wasn't run with --reject, we assume the end user
knows where to find the patch. This is normally true for
a single patch,
Not at all. Whether it is a single or broken, the patch
On 12-07-12 02:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
On 12-07-12 01:45 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
If git am wasn't run with --reject, we assume the end user
knows where to find the patch
the patch to do some sort of manual fixup, if we
are processing a mbox with more than one patch in it.
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com
---
[v2: drop text suggesting what to do with failed patch; only
emit the help text if we are processing mbox with multi patches]
git
On 12-07-13 03:58 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
If git am fails to apply something, the end user may need
to know where to find the patch. This is normally known for
a single patch, but if the user is processing a mbox with
many patches
Has anyone else noticed false positives coming from the
orphan check? It is warning me about commits that are
clearly on master. Here is an example, where I checkout
master~2 and then switch back to master. It somehow thinks
that master~2 is orphaned, when master~2 is by definition
in the
On 12-07-25 05:52 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
Has anyone else noticed false positives coming from the
orphan check?
Thanks. This should fix it.
Indeed it does. Thanks for the fix (and git in general).
Paul.
--
builtin/checkout.c
kernel stable trees) to have
the subjects remain invariant during a backport, there is
a genuine need for making this the default behaviour from
a config file, versus specifying it in scripts and on the
command line each time.
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com
---
See http
On 12-08-01 02:48 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
In order to make a commit be invariant (excluding ID) over
a format-patch and subsequent am cycle, one needs to use
the '--keep-non-patch' so that commits like:
[PATCH] [i386] fix foo bar
On 12-08-02 05:20 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com writes:
The '-D' or '--irreversible-delete' option of format-patch is
great for sending out patches to mailing lists, where there
is little value in seeing thousands of lines of deleted code.
Attention
It hasn't been used since 2006, as of commit 3cd4f5e8
git-apply --binary: clean up and prepare for --reverse
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com
diff --git a/builtin/apply.c b/builtin/apply.c
index d453c83..3bf71dc 100644
--- a/builtin/apply.c
+++ b/builtin/apply.c
/linux-head$ git reset --hard HEAD~ /dev/null
paul@builder:~/git/linux-head$ git am past.patch
note: commit is from implausibly old year 1977.
Applying: arch/sh: make heartbeat driver explicitly non-modular
paul@builder:~/git/linux-head$
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com
On 2015-07-30 12:35 AM, Jacob Keller wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Stefan Beller sbel...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Paul Gortmaker
paul.gortma...@windriver.com wrote:
The linux kernel repository has some commits in it with dates from
the year 1970 and also
17 matches
Mail list logo