Stefan Sperling wrote: > Looking at the patch(1) man page, it sounds like we don't really need > to reinvent the wheel here:
Phew! - wheels are complex, and the ones we make too often seem to have nails sticking out of them. > patch will choose the file name by performing the following steps, with > the first match used: > > 1. If patch is operating in strict IEEE Std 1003.1-2008 > (``POSIX'') > mode, the first of the ``old'', ``new'' and ``index'' file names > that exist is used. Otherwise, patch will examine either the > ``old'' and ``new'' file names or, for a non-context diff, the > ``index'' file name, and choose the file name with the fewest path > components, the shortest basename, and the shortest total file name > length (in that order). > > 2. If no file exists, patch checks for the existence of the > files in an > SCCS or RCS directory (using the appropriate prefix or suffix) using > the criteria specified above. If found, patch will attempt to get > or check out the file. > > 3. If no suitable file was found to patch, the patch file is a > context > or unified diff, and the old file was zero length, the new file name > is created and used. > > 4. If the file name still cannot be determined, patch will > prompt the > user for the file name to use. > > I suppose we could implement the method described in step 1. > That would make us compatible to UNIX patch, and should resolve the two > use cases I have in mind. > > Step 2 doesn't apply to us. Step 3 is used already. Step 4 could be > implemented as well (but I'd prefer to do that post-1.7). > > Thoughts? +1 to step 1. - Julian
