Re: git apply vs patch -p1

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: git apply vs patch -p1
Date: 2013-09-16 19:11:29
Message-ID: 8738p47feh.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Josh" == Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:

Josh> The issue isn't that, it's that git apply is just buggy and
Josh> can't tell the difference between a new file and a modified
Josh> one.

It's not the fault of git apply; the patch contained explicit
annotations on all the files claiming that they were new. Both the
patches I've looked at so far (picksplit NaNs and enable_material)
had the same defect.

The question is, how are these submitters preparing their patches?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2013-09-16 19:24:35 Re: Assertions in PL/PgSQL
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2013-09-16 19:06:57 Re: git apply vs patch -p1