On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 05:16:55PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 04:44:21PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote: > > > >> This command used to create a diff which can be consumed by patch. But > >> at least with 2.9.3 it just gives a rename output: > >> > >> git format-patch \ > >> --no-signature \ > >> --stdout \ > >> --break-rewrites \ > >> --keep-subject \ > >> 95fa0405c5991726e06c08ffcd8ff872f7fb4f2d^..95fa0405c5991726e06c08ffcd8ff872f7fb4f2d > >> > >> > >> What must be done now to get a usable patch? > > > > Probably --no-renames. > > > > Renames were enabled by default by 5404c11 (diff: activate diff.renames > > by default, 2016-02-25), which is in v2.9.0. > > > > I wonder if we should consider undoing that for format-patch, whose > > output may be consumed by non-git endpoints. > > I would say no (or more precisely: we should consider, but we should > reject the idea ;-) ), since patches with renames are useful and can be used > even outside Git's scope. GNU patch, which is probably the most widely > used implementation of patch supports git-style renames since 2.7, > released in September 2012. Ah, OK; I didn't realize GNU patch had picked up rename support. I agree that makes it less-bad for format-patch to start using them by default. Olaf, what version of patch are you using? -Peff -- 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