Re: [PATCH] Further changes, thanks to <tp@lists.linux.it>

From: Michael <barra_cuda@katamail.com>
Date: Aug 8, 2007, 21:04 UTC
Message-ID: <200708082304.53867.barra_cuda@katamail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070808172739.5647a81b@paolo-desktop>

On Wednesday 08 August 2007 17:27, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:

> Further changes, thanks to <tp@lists.linux.it>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com>
> ---

Is it just me, or this patch is corrupted?

>  po/it.po |  130
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------ 1 files
> changed, 67 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)

git-am says:

	Applying Further changes, thanks to <tp@lists.linux.it>

	fatal: corrupt patch at line 13
	Patch failed at 0001.

git-gui-i18n$ grep ^- .dotest/0001 | wc
     66     434    3074
git-gui-i18n$ grep ^+ .dotest/0001 | wc
     27     105     955

I think there's a problem somewhere...

Show 8 quoted lines

> diff --git a/po/it.po b/po/it.po
> index e87263e..1950b56 100644
> --- a/po/it.po
> +++ b/po/it.po
> @@ -2,18 +2,21 @@
>  # Copyright (C) 2007 Shawn Pearce
>  # This file is distributed under the same license as the git-gui
> package. # Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com>, 2007

Whitespace/newline corruption?

> -"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
> -"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
> +"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1\n"
> +"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit"

I'd guess the previous version is better :)

Show 10 quoted lines

> @@ -34,9 +37,9 @@ msgid ""
>  "\n"
>  "Assume '%s' is version 1.5.0?\n"
>  msgstr ""
> -"La versione di GIT non può essere determinata.\n"
>  "\n"
> -"%s sostiene che la versione è '%s'.\n"
>  "\n"
>  "%s richiede almeno Git 1.5.0 o superiore.\n"
>  "\n"

Here and in many other places there are unneeded deletions... Is that what you wanted? I don't think so, since the hunk header says "@@ -34,9 +37,9 @@". I guess gmail has done a mess with your patch: git-am had some problems parsing the headers too.

You should try to mail the same patch to yourself and re-apply that on your tree to see if it fails.