>>> 2.1.126. Also a reversed patch is not wrong, it is only reversed.
>>> patch does have a -R switch and will even detect a reversed patch
>>> and ask you if you would like to apply the -R switch.
> ^^^^^^^
>> And if this patch makes it into 2.1.127, then someone sees the
>> patch and tries it on 2.1.127, figuring that if 2.1.127 has it
>> already he'll see some errors...whoops! No errors, and the good
>> patch gets backed out.
> you should read a little more closely; if patch detects a reversed
> patch, it will ask you if you want to apply -R to this hunk.
To my mind, there's one obvious solution to this whole argument that
shouldn't be hard to implement: Why not get diff to check the
timestamps of the files being compared, and issuing a warning if it
sees it's being asked to create a patch from a new file to an older
one?
Perhaps somebody can advise where the problem is with that suggestion
- other than persuading everybody to use the revised version of diff,
that is ???
Best wishes from Riley.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/