On Wednesday 20 February 2002 12:02, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > If you look back in the archives this patch has actually been > submitted before... then being the -y option. Wasn't accepted that > happily by the core team (specifically Rusty) then, simply rejected > with the response "use yes | runme ...". Lets see what happens this > time.
oops, never noticed that one.. However, I don't want to force any patch that failed the tests, so yes | runme .. is not for me, as it would say yes to 'apply anyway' which I don't want. > Yes, that is the intention. runme does not know what to do in such > case and needs help. You have selected to apply the patch, runme > cannot tell why it fails or if it should fail, only that it cannot > apply the patch or detect that the patch is already applied. > It however currently only fails for a single patch in submitted and > none in base. runme properly detects that all other applied patches > are aldeady applied. At least when testing with a 2.4.17 kernel. Well, I was compiling a 2.4.18-rc1 when I was testing your --batch, and at least 3 patches in submitted/pending didn't apply.. > To work around this small problem, you can call runme individually > for each patch you want to apply, or wait for my next set of runme > patches: > * --exclude option to exclude individual patches > * the ability to specify a list of patches to apply I was trying to avoid running runme individually, so I guess I'll wait for the --exclude (I know, I'm lazy...) > Or add your own option to automatically skip failing patches. I do > not plan on making such an option as I'd like to have some control of > the result. If a patch fails I'd like to know about it in case it is > a patch I need. I'll probably do that for myself (unless anyone else is interested), and have a log in a file in case a patch doesn't apply, simply because I don't use this to fully automate patching, but simply to automate it as much as possible, so I can do something else while it patches :) > The changes are somewhat overlapping in diff format, and is why I > haven't posted them yet. > Up til some day ago I was using the -y patch, and listed each > individual patch I wanted to apply. Thanks again, Have a nice day, Fabrice. -- Fabrice MARIE Senior R&D Engineer Celestix Networks http://www.celestix.com/ "Silly hacker, root is for administrators" -Unknown
