Ilya Zakharevich on Sun, 19 Apr 1998 23:40:42 +0200 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: Humble request |
Gerhard Niklasch writes: > (2) It'll save me (and probably Karim) a few minutes' work if you do > all your diffs from the distribution's base directory (the one with the > version number in its name). Relative paths beginning with `./' are ok > if `.' is the base dir, although I prefer them without that. In this way, > each and every diff you find there can be applied by calling `patch -l -p0' > from the base directory (`-p0' = `remove zero slashes and everything > leading up to them from the path', i.e. use the given path). > > If you want to be particularly nice about this, paste in your diff > commandline as well. (It's a bit redundant but I prefer to see the > options. Recursive diffs should do this automatically.) Note that AFAIK the common practice is to do patches with -p1 option. Then paths given to diff should either start with ./ (if done in toplevel PARI directory), or done from a parent/kid directory to this one, and start with pari-2.0.5.alpha/ or ../ correspondingly. This is how I did my patches. Note that doing it from the parent directory (what I did not ;-) shows the version number as well. > (4) Ilya, your diff utility seems to be acting up. It frequently neglects > to put a newline after the `@@<line numbers>@@' marker, and the first line > of the current chunk then ends up on the same instead of on the following > line of the diff. Is there anything you could do about this? Hmm, are you refering to me doing diff -pu ? -p option gives an important feedback about the fixed function name, but some very old `patch'es do not grok it. Upgrade. Ilya