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 02:23:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 18 May 2002 02:23:14 -0400 Received: from dsl-213-023-043-065.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.43.65]:51850 "EHLO starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 18 May 2002 02:23:14 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: Htree directory index for Ext2, updated Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 08:22:56 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: "Albert D. Cahalan" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200205170736.g4H7aNj281162@saturn.cs.uml.edu> <20020518055808.GH21295@turbolinux.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 18 May 2002 07:58, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On May 18, 2002 07:44 +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > - 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. The solution to this appears to be to apply the patch with -g1. With -g0, strange things happen, as described above. -- Daniel