Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: patch for spelling mistake

From: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: patch for spelling mistake
Date: 2001-07-11 01:56:27
Message-ID: 20010710215627.C727@klamath.dyndns.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 08:58:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) writes:
> > > I think I made the patch properly; from the root of the 'pgsql'
> > > CVS module, apply with: patch -p0 < patchfile.
> > 
> > diff -c output is preferred.  A plain diff such as you have here has too
> > little context to be safe to apply (if someone else has edited the file
> > since the version you diffed from, a plain diff patch is much too likely
> > to be applied incorrectly).
> 
> Tom is right, diff -c is best, though in the patch you applied, there is
> no chance for error so I can accept it.  You have unique previous text
> for each change.

Sorry about that -- and thanks for the tip (Tom & Bruce).

I've remade the patch using the make_diff tools -- that seems to
produce the preferred the format. The updated patch is below.

I'm going to add this info to the Developer's FAQ, but it seems like
there are 2 copies -- one plaintext and one HTML: it seems as though
they are updated simultaneously (according to the CVS logs anyway).
Which version should I make changes to? Both? Are they generated from
a single source document somewhere?

Cheers,

Neil

*** ./src/backend/commands/cluster.c.orig	Tue Jul 10 21:34:14 2001
--- ./src/backend/commands/cluster.c	Tue Jul 10 21:34:30 2001
***************
*** 45,57 ****
   * cluster
   *
   * STILL TO DO:
!  *	 Create a list of all the other indicies on this relation. Because
   *	 the cluster will wreck all the tids, I'll need to destroy bogus
!  *	 indicies. The user will have to re-create them. Not nice, but
   *	 I'm not a nice guy. The alternative is to try some kind of post
   *	 destroy re-build. This may be possible. I'll check out what the
   *	 index create functiond want in the way of paramaters. On the other
!  *	 hand, re-creating n indicies may blow out the space.
   */
  void
  cluster(char *oldrelname, char *oldindexname)
--- 45,57 ----
   * cluster
   *
   * STILL TO DO:
!  *	 Create a list of all the other indexes on this relation. Because
   *	 the cluster will wreck all the tids, I'll need to destroy bogus
!  *	 indexes. The user will have to re-create them. Not nice, but
   *	 I'm not a nice guy. The alternative is to try some kind of post
   *	 destroy re-build. This may be possible. I'll check out what the
   *	 index create functiond want in the way of paramaters. On the other
!  *	 hand, re-creating n indexes may blow out the space.
   */
  void
  cluster(char *oldrelname, char *oldindexname)

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2001-07-11 02:09:18
Subject: RE: patch for spelling mistake
Previous:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2001-07-11 01:41:26
Subject: Re: Re: Backups WAS: 2 gig file size limit

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group