Re: [PATCH] am: add --check option

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 4, 2019, 14:06 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD0d5ptCpn+u8-p=oa3gZFYdbeW+KapVcmKgqPQKR4scwA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c1dec466-55ca-8543-8f4e-b5daf1e0eab6@kdbg.org>

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 8:03 AM Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

>
> Am 04.06.19 um 00:00 schrieb Drew DeVault:
> > On Mon Jun 3, 2019 at 11:09 PM Johannes Sixt wrote:
> >> I have to wonder how --check works when 'am' applies multiple patches.
> >>
> >> When the second patch in a patch series depends on that the first patch
> >> is fully applied, what does --check do? Without the first patch applied,
> >> then a naive check of the second patch will certainly fail, doesn't it?
> >
> > Yeah, this was being discussed in another thread. It'll fail if the
> > second patch relies on changes from the first. Open to suggestions on
> > how to improve that, but I think it can be improved in a later patch.

I think both features could be useful. For example sometimes a maintainer might want to know if applying only a patch that is in the middle of a patch series (for example something security related) could work without having to apply the previous patchs. So maybe both a --check and a --dry-run with different behavior regarding patch series would make sense.