Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jun 1999 18:44:01 -0400 | From | Wakko Warner <> | Subject | Re: Patch 2.2.10 is wrong |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > The new behaviour is fairly horrible if something goes wrong, though: it > leaves the ".orig" file only for the files that had trouble, not the > files that were successfully patched without warnings. That makes it > harder to "revert" a patch that had partial problems. It's still > possible, but it's definitely less user-friendly for that case.
I have all the source trees from 2.2.1 to the newest (via patches starting at 2.2.2). This does sorta pertain to the above about backups (I hear people saying it's a waste of space <g>. It's not too much, just the size of 2 full kernels) I unpack the tarball, mv it to the version number, and cp -lax <version> linux then patch that.
This is where I get confused sometimes... I'd rather just do this:
cp -lax 2.2.9 2.2.10 cd 2.2.10 zcat ../patch-2.2.10.gz|patch -p2
I get through most files ok, but some don't patch right and it doesn't make sense. Anyone shed some light on that?
BTW, if the patch goes bad, rm -rf 2.2.10 (or whatever) and start over again.... It breaks hard links to files that change which I like =) (Please, lets not talk about the links. I realize how thats done =)
- 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/
| |