Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 00:42:44 +0300 (MSK) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Dmitrij Tejblum <tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG, dima@tejblum.dnttm.rssi.ru Subject: Re: amanda port, empty PATCH_STRIP= lines causes trouble Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980120003928.21007A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> In-Reply-To: <199801191817.VAA19292@yandex.hq.cti.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > > > > > Indeed, in old patch context diff header (i.e. "***" and "---" lines) > > > takes precedence over an Index: line. But new patch simple *ignore* > > > Index: line, unless POSIXLY_CORRECT environment variable is set. > > > > The subject discussed is exactly that Index: and ***/--- lines order. > > If old one consider ***/--- first and new one simple ignore Index:, it > > means that _both_ treat CVS generated diffs equally, i.e. don't pay any > > attention on Index: > > Nope. I just posted example of old behavior. Old patch looked at ***/--- > lines, could not find file to patch, and *after it* looked at Index: line, > and could find this file. New patch ignore Index: even after it couldn't find > file in ***/--- lines. This is the difference. We talk about CVS generated diffs for ports system here, old name assumed to exist. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nietzsche.net> http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980120003928.21007A-100000>