From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 18 May 2002 02:00:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 18 May 2002 02:00:24 -0400 Received: from h24-67-14-151.cg.shawcable.net ([24.67.14.151]:60913 "EHLO webber.adilger.int") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 18 May 2002 02:00:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 23:58:08 -0600 From: Andreas Dilger To: Daniel Phillips Cc: "Albert D. Cahalan" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Htree directory index for Ext2, updated Message-ID: <20020518055808.GH21295@turbolinux.com> Mail-Followup-To: Daniel Phillips , "Albert D. Cahalan" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200205170736.g4H7aNj281162@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <20020518053458.GF21295@turbolinux.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-GPG-Key: 1024D/0D35BED6 X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7A37 5D79 BF1B CECA D44F 8A29 A488 39F5 0D35 BED6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On May 18, 2002 07:44 +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Saturday 18 May 2002 07:34, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > On May 18, 2002 03:21 +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > Patch is severely broken in its current form, not only for the > > > reasons you stated, but also because of its inability to handle > > > renaming in any sane way. I want a patch --sane option. > > > > I bet BitKeeper gets it right... ;-) ;-) ;-) > > Funny you should mention that, since Bitkeeper has embarrassed itself pretty > badly with respect to patches, so far. > > - Somebody decided to add another level on top of the linux root directory > in their source directory. I can't import patches into that. Hmm, I'm not sure what you are referring to here. > - I can apply patches to bitkeeper repository using the normal 'patch', > but Bitkeeper gets its revenge later, as each bk edit command starts > off by throwing away the patch. This is also strange, as when I use patch to apply a patch to files not checked out, patch asks me if I should check them out in write mode (which I do, of course). Of course, if you are using patch to apply changes to a BK tree it isn't really BK in the end. What I was referring to was importing a changeset would probably get the target files correct 100% of the time, unlike the situation you are describing with patch. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/