Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 3 Jul 2017 18:17:27 +0000
From:      Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cem@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r320579 - head/usr.bin/patch
Message-ID:  <20170703181727.GA99316@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <ad1564e9-fa9a-1006-59dd-7ecee305a04d@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201707022100.v62L0Ume001253@repo.freebsd.org> <CAG6CVpW4DYOzyacfEVQq%2B1WBGd1KO0m79zqJbGYPAyb6zS_5TQ@mail.gmail.com> <ad1564e9-fa9a-1006-59dd-7ecee305a04d@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 10:42:15AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> On 07/02/17 21:53, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> > Does this change the behavior of 'patch -p1' (for example) with 'git
> > diff' generated diffs?  So patches that could be applied with -p1
> > before now need to be applied with -p0?  Or is this a different mode
> > of patch?
> 
> IMHO, the (new) BSD patch behavior is somewhat more natural in the sense
> that no one asked git to add a prefix to the path so it makes sense to
> ignore it.

But -p1 already solves the problem; why add any ad-hoc handling to some
particular program that tends to generate patches whatever the way it
does?
 
./danfe



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170703181727.GA99316>