On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > With --unidiff-zero, also _adding_ lines will be handled as if there were > no problem. > > Yes, in your case it fixes a problem. > > Yet, in other cases it introduces a problem. Well, we could make the rule be that ew require --unidiff-zero only if there really is _no_ old data to verify in a hunk. No deleted lines, and no context around it. Adrian has a point in that if there are lines to be deleted, that in itself is context, and then the strict behaviour of "git-apply" is arguably unnecessaily strict. That said, I do absolutely _hate_ how GNU patch will basically apply random line noise without complaints. So git-apply is designed to be much stricter on _so_ many levels. The thing that I personally always really detested about GNU patch was how it would apply part of a patch, then fail half-way, and leave the partial patch applied! git-apply is about a million times better than standard "patch", exactly because it tries to make sure that what it does makes sense, and you actually need to use explicit flags to make it do things that may be hard to undo or slightly questionable. Linus - 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
