Re: [PATCH 3/2] format-patch: use clear_commit_marks() instead of some adhocery

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Martin Langhoff wrote:

> the patches should be rather obvious, GNU patch recognises them as
> 'already applied', but they may be slightly different in ways that
> break the hashing.

Did you try with git-apply? This is much more anal than GNU patch, and 
should give you an idea what is happening.

> I'll play with git-cherry to see, I assume that you've copied the logic 
> from there.

Yup. Well, from git-patch-id, but that was used by git-cherry.

Note that I made sure that the patch-id is the same as for git-patch-id. 
It only differs with renaming patches (the "---" and "+++" lines are 
hashed, to make sure it is the same patch, but the "rename from" and 
"rename to" lines are not generated by diff_flush_patch_id()).

Ciao,
Dscho

-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]