Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Patch 2.2.10 is wrong | From | Jes Sorensen <> | Date | 14 Jun 1999 23:24:56 +0200 |
| |
>>>>> "Linus" == Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> writes:
Linus> I have to admit that I think the POSIX patch behaviour is less Linus> than optimal, and the first time I saw it I went "oh, crap, who Linus> came up with this idea?"
Hmmm, couldn't have put it better ;-)
Linus> Oh, well. The best behaviour would probably be to always do Linus> the backup files, and then if everything patches cleanly you Linus> remove the files at the very end - but if there is any problem Linus> what-so-ever you'd leave all backup files alone, even for files Linus> that were successfully patched.
Nod
Linus> This is one of the things that source control makes a Linus> non-issue, of course, so in that sense the new behaviour is Linus> more source-control- oriented.
I rely heavily on 'find . -type f -size 0b \! -name \*,t' to find out what files are new so I can make sure to include them in my CVS tree. In this sense I'd say 2.5 is far less source control friendly.
The lack of having .orig's generated per default like 2.1 did and not having an env-var one could set to get 2.5 to use the same defaults as 2.1 is what makes me really dislike 2.5.
Oh well, I guess I should get back to coding ;-)
Jes
- 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/
| |