Re: git apply vs patch -p1

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: git apply vs patch -p1
Date: 2013-09-14 19:03:52
Message-ID: 5234B318.5020406@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 09/14/2013 02:37 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Lately I've been running into a lot of reports of false conflicts
> reported by "git apply". The most recent one was the "points" patch,
> which git apply rejected for completely ficticious reasons (it claimed
> that the patch was trying to create a new file where a file already
> existed, which it wasn't).
>
> I think we should modify the patch review and developer instructions to
> recommend always using patch -p1 (or -p0, depending), even if the patch
> was produced with "git diff".
>
> Thoughts?
>

FWIW that's what I invariably use.

You do have to be careful to git-add/git-rm any added/deleted files,
which git-apply does for you (as well as renames) - I've been caught by
that a couple of times.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marko Tiikkaja 2013-09-14 19:04:34 Re: Proposal: PL/PgSQL strict_mode
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-09-14 18:58:32 Re: record identical operator