Re: [PATCH] git-am: indicate where a failed patch is to be found.

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 12, 2012, 18:53 UTC
Message-ID: <7va9z4byl3.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <4FFF1821.7030705@windriver.com>

Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On 12-07-12 01:45 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> writes:
>> 
>>> If git am wasn't run with --reject, we assume the end user
>>> knows where to find the patch.  This is normally true for
>>> a single patch,
>> 
>> Not at all.  Whether it is a single or broken, the patch is fed to
>> underlying "apply" from an unadvertised place.
>
> What I meant by this was the difference between:
>
> 	git am 0001-some-standalone-single.patch
> vs.
> 	git am mbox
>
> In the 1st, the standalone patch is 100% clear and easy to access,
> because we really don't need/care about the unadvertised place.

It does not matter at all that 0001-foo.patch only has a single patch. If you are going to fix up the patch after you saw "git am" failed, you will be fixing .git/rebase-apply/patch with your editor and re-run "git am" without arguments, at which point "git am" will not look at your 0001-foo.patch file at all.

Show 6 quoted lines

>> This is _NOT_ fine, especially if you suggest "patch" the user may
>> not have, and more importantly does not have a clue why "git apply"
>> rejected it ("am" does _not_ use "patch" at all).
>
> I'm not 100% sure I'm following what part here is not OK.  If you
> can help me understand that, I'll respin the change accordingly.

Do not ever mention "patch -p1". It is not the command that "git am" uses, and it is not what detected the breakage in the patch.

The command to guide the user to is "git apply".