Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 10 Mar 2001 21:23:40 -0800 (PST)
From:      Joseph Scott <joseph.scott@owp.csus.edu>
To:        Michael Lucas <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: context or unified diffs in PRs?
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103102121300.96318-100000@pebkac.owp.csus.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20010310124249.A87381@blackhelicopters.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Michael Lucas wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I'm afraid I might be walking up to a bikeshed with a can of paint
> here, but the flood of email in the last twenty-four hours has
> convinced me to ask.
> 
> In an article O'Reilly published yesterday, I stated (per the
> Handbook) that context diffs were the correct way to submit patches
> with PRs.  I've had several people claim that unified diffs are the
> way to go, and that the handbook is just wrong.
> 
> Is the Handbook correct, or are unified diffs preferred?  I'll be
> happy to fix my article and submit a PR to correct the Handbook if
> this is the case.

	When I read your article I thought that perhaps that was a
mistake, but quickly started looking at something else and forgot about
it.

	I'd always thought unified was better, and felt justified after
reading this section in the FreeBSD Porter's Handbook

http://www.freebsd.org/docs/en/books/porters-handbook/port-upgrading.html

third paragraph, where the example diff they use is diff -ruN for
upgrading a port.

-Joseph


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0103102121300.96318-100000>