On 01/10/21 13:59, Robert Pollak wrote:
> On 2021-01-06 16:58, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> On 01/04/21 20:54, Robert Pollak wrote:
> [...]
>>> I see the following problems with my patch:
>>>
>>> 1) It is totally untested with all the other args that are collected in
>>> diffargs, like e.g. "-O<orderfile>", since I didn't need them yet.
>>
>> It would be really great if gitk supported both "-O<orderfile>" and
>> --find-copies-harder!
>
> Can you please test these options with my patch and report back?
>
> -- Robert
>
The patch doesn't apply with git-am (I'm trying on top of 72c4083ddf91):
> Applying: gitk: Activate --find-copies-harder
> error: corrupt patch at line 100
> Patch failed at 0001 gitk: Activate --find-copies-harder
> hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch' to see the failed patch
> When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
> If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
> To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
One problem could be the embedded diff in the notes section (I guess it
could confuse git-am).
Also, "gitk" has existed at "gitk-git/gitk" since commit 62ba5143ec2a
("Move gitk to its own subdirectory", 2007-11-18), so the pathname
headers in the patch look wrong.
Thanks
Laszlo
