On 2023/05/31 18:36:42 +0300, Anton Konyahin <m...@konyahin.xyz> wrote: > On 31/05, Omar Polo wrote: > > >Agreed. I prefer the second patch too, which I'm reattaching since it > >was mangled (whitespaces; 'patch -l' is not enough, but 'got patch' > >managed to apply it.) > > My bad, I am still not very comfortable with mailing patches, but I will > learn.
no problem :-) You can try mailing the diff to yourself and trying to apply it when in doubt. Some MUA seems to make inlining diffs hard. Attaching one could also work. > >Will wait a bit still in case someone disagrees, but I don't really > >see the point in having hack scraping $PATH for finding itself; the > >format wasn't changed since the initial import so I guess we'll be > >fine :-) Committed, thanks!
