On Wednesday 2007 February 07 08:27, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I do not understand this remark, as applypatch does not have -p > either. If we were to do this, I agree with others that this Oh. That /would/ make it confusing. I didn't realise they both didn't have it (I thought I had used it at some point in the past, my swiss cheese memory). In that case, the patch is a lot more relevant. > should simply be called -p (we do not have name crash with > existing options, do we?). I have no problem with it being "-p"; I just don't like to take valuable single letter namespace unilaterally. > After seeing that a patch does not apply because the patch was > generated at the wrong level, it would be very natural to use > "git apply -p0 --index .dotest/patch" and then continue with > "git am --resolved". So obviously, -p to git-apply is very > useful, but -p given to "am" means all of the patches in your > mailbox has uniformly wrong patch depth. I wonder how common > would that be in practice. I added it because I had need for it; I managed to manufacture a whole series of patches at the wrong patch level. It had been hard work to make them, so I didn't feel like making them all again just to change the depth. > But other than that "how useful would that be in practice?" > This is wrong if you do not use any $patchdepth. Guilty. As I said, I added it for my own use; so didn't mind too much about weird output. If I resent it would be to drop my modifications to the message (it's redundant anyway - surely you know what you specified on the command line?), so feel free to just remove that hunk. Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE andyparkins@xxxxxxxxx - To unsubscribe from this list: 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