On Sun, 08 May 2005 23:45:34 +0900 Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pascal Bourguignon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > You can force edit it (see the other answers), but I think the best > > way to "edit" a patch, is to duplicate the source directory, apply the > > patch on one copy, edit this copy of the source files, then invoke > > diff to create a new patch. > > Note that editing a patch with emacs `diff-mode' active is actually > fairly painless, because diff-mode takes care of keeping details like > the line counts updated, offers convenient functions like hunk- > splitting, makes it super easy to test your changes, etc. I regularly > edit patches directly because of diff-mode. > > [A common reason to edit a patch is because it _won't_ apply otherwise: > you basically look at the patch to see why doesn't match the source, > edit the patch to test your guess, and if it then applies cleanly, > you've got a nice record in the edited patch.] In such cases I just prefer to apply the patch and fix the rejects, gives you a better overall view. Editing patches for is useful when I know what I want to fix for sending out a patch and I don't feel like applying it, changing the source and re-diffing (especially useful with large source, such as modifying patches for the X or kernel source trees) > > -Miles > -- > "Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're > just making him madder and madder." -- Homer Simpson > > > _______________________________________________ > Help-gnu-emacs mailing list > Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System > at the Tel-Aviv University CC. > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System at the Tel-Aviv University CC. _______________________________________________ Help-gnu-emacs mailing list Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
