Re: [bug-patch] Patch fails to replace unmodified files

[Andreas Grünbacher]

2015-06-02 9:35 GMT+02:00 Andrew Church <address@hidden>:
> You would be wrong, because patch already creates exactly one additional
> copy of the file (*.orig).  Formerly, foo.orig was always the original
> directory entry and foo was always a newly created file.  With the
> behavior I argue to be a bug, if all hunks for a file fail, then foo is
> the original directory entry and foo.orig is a newly created file.
> Either way, patch uses the same amount of disk space.

That's indeed weird; the .orig file would have to be a hardlink for the kind
of consistency I'm thinking of. But then that might confuse people who are
not used to hard links. (It's a different situation if you're working with hard-
linked trees in the firt place.)

I'll think about this some more.

Thanks,
Andreas