On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 10:38 AM, steve <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a couple of points worth mentioning ...

Cool. I jumped in since I found your mail interesting.

> "--dry-run" switch. According to the man page:
>       --dry-run
>          Print the results of applying the patches without actually changing
> any files.
>
> Another userful switch is the -b or -B switches - Make backup file of the
> files being patched. See the man page for more info.

Well good. But not convincing enough for me to like patch
though. Sorry.

> Umm. That is incorrect. patch reads from stdin. So, you can also
> send the
> output of a pipe to patch. For instance in the days before git, the quick
> way to update your kernel sources if you already had an old version of the
> sources was to get only the patchset and apply them. Something like ...
>
> $ cd /usr/src/patches
> $ wget -O- ftp://www.kernel.org/<url>/patch-<version>.bz2 | bunzip2 - |
> patch -p1

Agreed. But this is not what I said. If you have nothing in stdin, then
read the file I give in stdin. Isn't that obvious?

As I said Larry complicates unnecessarily.

> ...so, you can also send multiple patchfiles to patch ...
>

Of course, that is a good thing. The utility is powerful but I
don't like it. It should have been way more simpler and friendlier
and still powerful.

-Girish


-- 
Gayatri Hitech
web: http://gayatri-hitech.com

SpamCheetah Spam filter:
http://spam-cheetah.com
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, email [email protected] with
"unsubscribe <password> <address>"
in the subject or body of the message.
http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc

Reply via email to