On 4/4/22 23:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: >> On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: >>> >>>> Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they >>>> wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see >>>> https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). >>> >>> That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any >>> problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. >> >> Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was >> generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: >> >> --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h >> +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h >> >> I changed these to: >> >> --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h >> +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h >> >> This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand >> from scratch. >> > > Yes, I believe the suggestion should be to use git-format-patch instead. > > To make sure that was is posted can be consumed by the git-am command. Considering that I am not using git, I think it will be difficult to use git-format-patch. (git-send-email is independent of git.) Still, this is the first time in many years that I have heard of this problem. Thanks for the info and insights. -- ~Randy
