Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 08:27:07 +0300 (MSK) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Dmitrij Tejblum <dima@tejblum.dnttm.rssi.ru> Cc: Dmitrij Tejblum <tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: amanda port, empty PATCH_STRIP= lines causes trouble Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980120082408.22763A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980120075653.22622A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, Андрей Чернов wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > > > This is a real example of CVS generated diff, until you fixed CVS. File > > index.cpp doesn't exists in the current directory, but it *exists* in the > > > So, please don't say that old GNU patch always ignored Index: line, and there > > is no difference. It is simple don't true. I have already tried, as you > > requested. You can try too. Don't be lazy! > > My answer about equal treating was answer on particual question of > Index: precedance handling with right result assumed (i.e. patching right > file in case we have directory tree). It is wrong result that is > different, but right result is one; since people interested in right > result I talk about this clause strictly. For all possible nits see > patch(1) and patch source, but it is outside this discussion subject. Right result is "under no case Index precedance taken to patch needed file for directory tree", it is equal for bot old and new variants. Assumed by people wrong result based on "hacked" FreeBSD patch impression is "Index precedence taken in old variant". -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nietzsche.net> http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980120082408.22763A-100000>