[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [BUG] tla delta should not put everything t

From: Amit Shah
Subject: Re: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [BUG] tla delta should not put everything to stdout
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:52:27 +0530

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 20:29:09 -0700 (PDT), Tom Lord <address@hidden> wrote:
>     > > Amit Shah <address@hidden> writes:
>     > >> Normal behavior should be that just the patch be put in 
> something.patch
>     > >> and the "* finding or making x", etc, output be put on stderr.

> That stuff is a legitamate part of the "report" of what the command
> does.

Yeah, I guess so.

> In theory, we could add a --quiet option to surpress it.   I'm willing
> to merge such a change if it's important.   But I have trouble seeing
> why it would be important.

Yeah, --quiet would be nice; though the actual thing should be
achieved by the following:

>     > Also, a new option, perhaps, to tla delta to output just a GNU patch 
> file,
>     > so that patches can be sent to people not using arch could be added...?
> Or a new command for that -- one that would warn you if the patch
> isn't faithful (e.g., there are renames or adds or deletes to deal
> with).  That's fine.  That's trivial.  Merged on demand, modulo my
> slowness lately (sorry about that --- big planning phase going on).

The warnings, etc, should be okay, since some one who wants a patch
knows what it means. Dealing with adds, renames, etc, shouldn't be an
issue, since the patch should just list all the changes -- renames
will be some file removed and some file added. The user wants a patch,
let's give him a patch. Someone may need a patch to post it to some
non-Arch-using community, for example.

> -t

Amit Shah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]