Re: [PATCH] [RFC] adding support for .patches and /proc/patches.gz
From: Paul Eggert
Date: Mon May 10 2004 - 13:41:28 EST
Jon Oberheide <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I'm CC'ing this to the GNU patch maintainers. Hopefully they will have
> some input.
As I understand it, Solution 4 is an incompatible change to 'patch'
which would cause 'patch' to not conform to POSIX, the LSB, or to
widespread existing practice. That's a pretty serious step, and I'm
not sure it's worth the aggravation.
Solution 3 would be to add an option to 'patch' to cause it to log the
patches into a file. The basic idea seems like a worthwhile
improvement to 'patch', though (as you mention) it's more of a hassle
for users to remember the option.
Perhaps there's a better way to address the problem in a way that
maintains compatibility while still satisfying your needs. For example,
if the kernel patches all contained a line like this at the start:
then 'patch' could log all the changes into the named file. This
would conform to POSIX.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/