[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-portage-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] eapply: Drop -s option for patch.
From:       Mike Gilbert <floppym () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2019-12-14 16:22:00
Message-ID: CAJ0EP43unWh5EOYP9Byy2X_ZJnTRuMkmM5FW0pKgX7GNTrAf3Q () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 8:12 AM Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 3:41 AM Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny <mgorny@gentoo.org=
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2019-12-13 at 17:15 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 4:42 PM Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny <mgorny@gentoo=
.org> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2019-12-13 at 16:37 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 3:36 PM Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny <mgorny@ge=
ntoo.org> wrote:
> > > > > > Just like 'many of the proposals lately', developers are going =
to be
> > > > > > the ones disabling it (because they don't care), and users will=
 be the
> > > > > > ones enabling it (because they do care), just to learn that dev=
elopers
> > > > > > don't care and go complaining to the mailing lists that users d=
are
> > > > > > report issues they don't care about.
> > > > >
> > > > > I care if the patch is actually broken, which the warning doesn't
> > > > > really tell me. It's just not a very reliable indicator, and will
> > > > > produce false-positives frequently.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > You can also take less context into the patch and use -F0.  Then yo=
u'll
> > > > have the same effect, no warnings to bother you and no pretending t=
hat
> > > > the patch applies when it doesn't.
> > >
> > > That really doesn't help me. My point is that I don't want to touch
> > > the patch unless it is actually necessary to do so.
> > >
> >
> > Then make patches with -U0.
>
> As others have already stated, I might not be the one making the patch
> in the first place.
>
> Your position seems to be that ignoring any amount of context is bad,
> and I simply don't agree with that. If you can show me that it is
> causing an epidemic of broken patches to be applied erroneously, you
> might change my mind. Otherwise, please stop with the non-solutions
> you keep throwing at me.

After giving it some further thought, I suppose I'm overreacting to
this a bit. Most patches won't be affected by this anyway.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]