Re: git diff woes
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Nov 12, 2007, 10:35 UTC
- Message-ID
- <47382C84.50408@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711120958500.4362@racer.site>
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Show 20 quoted lines
> Hi, > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote: > >> I recently ran into an oddity with the excellent git diff output >> format. When a function declaration changes in the same patch as >> something else in a function, the old declaration is used with the >> diff hunk-headers. >> >> [...] >> >> It definitely looks like a bug, but really isn't, since an earlier hunk >> (pasted below) changes the declaration. >> >> [...] >> >> This makes it impossible to trust the hunk-header info if the declaration >> changes. > > Huh? You admit yourself that it is not a bug.
In the check_ntpd.c program, there is no bug. I found the git diff output surprising, so I reported it.
Show 12 quoted lines
> And sure you can trust the > hunk header. Like most of the things, the relate to the _original_ > version, since the diff is meant to be applied as a forward patch. > > So for all practical matters, the diff shows the correct thing: "in this > hunk, which (still) belongs to that function, change this and this." > > Of course, that is only the case if you accept that the diff should be > applied _in total_, not piecewise. IOW if you are a fan of GNU patch > which happily clobbers your file until it fails with the last hunk, you > will not be happy. >
You're right. GNU patch will apply one hunk and then happily churn on even if it fails. git-apply will apply all hunks or none, so all hunks can assume that all previous hunks were successfully applied. So what was your point again?
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231