On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 04:38:57PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > Anton Vorontsov wrote: >> I always thought that posting "-M" patches to the public lists is >> discouraged since it is quite difficult to apply them via patch(1). >> Also think of non-git users... > > I think the substantially enhanced reviewability trumps non-git-users > who can follow the rename instructions manually (or fix up their patch > utility) if they insist on shunning tools that would make their life > easier.
Can't disagree, I myself use git. ;-) But I'm also using standard patch(1) to test occasional patches... And sometimes linux-X tree isn't tracked by git (e.g. -mm otm snapshots). >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..ae5708e >> [...] >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/dma_64.c >> deleted file mode 100644 >> index ae5708e..0000000 >> >> That is, if hashes match then it was pure rename. > > I suppose, though it's not as easy to spot, and won't help in showing > what the differences are if there are any. ..rename and changes ideally go in separate patches. IIRC this also helps git to track renames (it can easily compare hashes instead of guessing). -- Anton Vorontsov email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2 _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
