Re: git apply vs patch -p1

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: git apply vs patch -p1
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1wJ+RGubfv5QCzz2R4PvfR2SW6xY+JfeLje+4jj6zX05g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: git apply vs patch -p1  (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>)
Ответы Re: git apply vs patch -p1  (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> "Josh" == Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:

 Josh> The issue isn't that, it's that git apply is just buggy and
 Josh> can't tell the difference between a new file and a modified
 Josh> one.

It's not the fault of git apply; the patch contained explicit
annotations on all the files claiming that they were new. Both the
patches I've looked at so far (picksplit NaNs and enable_material)
had the same defect.

The question is, how are these submitters preparing their patches?

I used "git diff" configured to use src/tools/git-external-diff, as described here:


The resulting patch applies fine with patch, but not with git apply.

If I instead generate a patch with git diff --no-ext-diff, then it applies with git apply.

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Assertions in PL/PgSQL
Следующее
От: Marko Tiikkaja
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Updatable view columns