From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 27 01:32:18 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D7D3EED for ; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 01:32:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from nm7-vm4.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm7-vm4.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [98.136.218.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1D6B2B1A for ; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 01:32:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [216.39.60.180] by nm7.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Jul 2013 01:29:45 -0000 Received: from [208.71.42.204] by tm16.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Jul 2013 01:29:45 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp215.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Jul 2013 01:29:45 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 740697.53523.bm@smtp215.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: G3hCB8oVM1k8lbmrWiJLJd8nTIQpBw7wFApdRahBwHGUwjN J93CKH4T6ZtSUJLuz0I93VyanY6lidBmdqDGf4A1PZDMrd2EFRTztp0WxRWi 706P5lghOAnyz4JCGw7bZl0EBju9zTz3UA_t4H_w5tpd_kpgTmKlYywJa71P 3F_fJ4BMdik_eTK1gNkQZGEuHM4y6t5gXN1YbJlS2bV94bDg2UurP2srp7ag FMV8zVoLMDzV7PsIc3OW6YLdFeC0xQ94UrJZS8pg5tmMXeRIq6ul3yIMEOkx h300TaUYNVMCIMZu72ajF.4qw9v1flli8FzQy6fknUWny.i16U9zX8iM1Kjn Z70dwq593P0JwVr1Z0PQF.k8GxfN1sX4S_lJpYaXOTVlgoYuoM..G0FVrITX wKT0ZVKsnUXtQcQstxTLcjeaYjWi92RjNtZHA8iq.H.WUn18JgO.sNgJ7YXn ZBh0vIWIVLjwzm1xXVyjHLTqgPywAKEV8WMl2lIij0fhArcNvBQwEoZSWvJe dHm.OeCly4ZF4YqquZY6tQufR_UTQvKE- X-Yahoo-SMTP: xcjD0guswBAZaPPIbxpWwLcp9Unf X-Rocket-Received: from [192.168.0.102] (pfg@190.157.126.109 with ) by smtp215.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Jul 2013 18:29:45 -0700 PDT Message-ID: <51F32288.7050701@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 20:29:44 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni Organization: FreeBSD User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Beich Subject: Re: [Heads up] BSD-licensed patch becoming the default RSN. References: <51F2E627.9090907@FreeBSD.org> <1V2ssp-000Nrk-Q8@internal.tormail.org> In-Reply-To: <1V2ssp-000Nrk-Q8@internal.tormail.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: FreeBSD Current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 01:32:18 -0000 Hi Jan; El 26/07/2013 8:01 p. m., Jan Beich escribió: > bsdpatch doesn't list files of the failed hunks with -C and -s option. > This may be less convenient if you edit a patch directly rather than > regen it after polluting the tree. > > $ patch -CEfsp0 -i /path/to/varsym.diff > 1 out of 1 hunks failed > 1 out of 2 hunks failed > 2 out of 2 hunks failed > 1 out of 5 hunks failed > 1 out of 1 hunks failed > 1 out of 1 hunks failed > 1 out of 1 hunks failed > zsh: exit 1 > > $ gnupatch -CEfsp0 -i /path/to/varsym.diff > 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to contrib/openbsm/etc/audit_event.rej > 1 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to lib/libc/sys/Makefile.inc.rej > 2 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/security/audit/audit_private.h.rej > 1 out of 5 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/security/audit/audit.h.rej > 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/bsm/audit_kevents.h.rej > 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/kern/syscalls.master.rej > 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/sys/priv.h.rej > zsh: exit 8 > Very interesting, thank you! Now, just some food for thought, but if you are unsure your patch applies cleanly, why would you choose to use the -s (silent) option? It would seem to me that some people may want the -s option to be truly silent (those paths may be long) and since those .rej files are not really being created it is consistent not to list them. FWIW, one thing that I have been thinking is that it may make sense to update gnupatch to the latest GPLv2 version and decide later when to drop it. Regards, Pedro.