Hello Jean, On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 12:40:36PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 11:08 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > I just pushed a new test case to cover this situation, so we won't > > introduce that kind of regression. > > By the way, this test case revealed a few inconsistencies. While most > commands properly report "No series file found" if you are not in a > quilt-managed tree, 3 commands diverge from this behavior: > > * "quilt pop" reports "No patch removed" instead, which while not > incorrect, is not consistent. > > * "quilt series" report nothing. That's what Martin's patch aimed at > fixing. I wonder it should report "No series file found" even when not > in verbose mode? That would seem more consistent. > > * "quilt snapshot" creates a .pc/ subdirectory and an empty .snap/ > directory there. Again while not fundamentally wrong, it doesn't seem > particularly useful in the absence of a series file. > > I'll look into fixing "pop" and "snapshot" to behave the same as all > other commands.
Thanks for your investigation, Jean. quilt is lucky to have you: you are doing a great job here. And I manage to mess even simple patches :) IMHO, the only thing that is important to fix the former Debian bug is that something is reported when using 'quilt series' out of a quilt-managed tree. Reporting "No series file found" even when not in verbose mode would be really perfect. I guess that whoever did that patch back in 2014 wanted to reduce the divergence with upstream code, thus reducing the visibility of the fix to verbose situations. Thanks again, Mt. -- Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts. -- Churchill (?)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Quilt-dev mailing list Quilt-dev@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/quilt-dev