Re: git-diff/git-format-patch safe for GNU (or POSIX) patch?
- From
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
- Date
- Jun 26, 2008, 13:44 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080626134400.GC12567@machine.or.cz>
- In-Reply-To
- <58284.213.203.159.164.1214480989.squirrel@upmail.polettix.it>
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 01:49:49PM +0200, Flavio Poletti wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> Thanks for the feedback! I wonder if this feature of patch "ignoring" > stuff it doesn't understand is a GNU feature or a POSIX feature, but I'm > abusing your patience here. (Incidentally, I also saw that POSIX has no > "unified" format, but this "ignoring" feature might apply in a wider > sense).
As you say, POSIX does not specify unified diffs at all. I'm not sure if patch's policy is as relaxed for other formats and I didn't find any mention of this relaxed policy in the SUS spec, but unified diffs with extraneous information intertwined are extremely widespread; about any VCSes out there append extra information to the diffs.
Incidentally, does anyone actually know about _any_ other patch tool in the wild that is _not_ based on the original Larry Wall's patch?
-- Petr "Pasky" Baudis The last good thing written in C++ was the Pachelbel Canon. -- J. Olson