Previously, using -S/--skip, -f/--force, or -t/--batch to skip a patch in
a patchset still registers a failure which causes patch to return a
non-zero exit code. This is particularly undesirable with regards to
ports as there is no way to ignore the non-zero code. (Luckily, we don't
currently have any ports that make use of any of these options.)
The PR (yes, my own) is slightly incorrect: It states that -f does indeed
properly skip patches. It does, but it still sets the failure flag causing
patch to return non-zero.
PR: 19638
Submitted by: kbyanc@posi.net
It maybe right, if patch was FreeBSD-own program, but it break compatibility
with pre-existent patches in other systems.
The example is big ncurses patch which don't apply on FreeBSD
due to "fixed" precedence.
controlling terminal is closed. Now the function ask() will return 1 when th
input is known to come from a file or terminal, or it will return 0 when ther
was a read error.
Modified the question "Skip patch?" so that on an error from ask it will skip
the patch instead of looping.
Closes PR#777
2.2 candidate
with valid names, the ***/---names were taken first.
this broke eg:
Index: foo/Makefile
==========
RCS <blah>
Retrieving <blah>
diff <blah>
*** Makefile <blah>
--- Makefile <blah>
By trying to patch the Makefile in the _curent_ directory, rather than
the one in the foo/ directory.
in the diff. This makes it so that diffs containing files in different
subdirectories that have the same name not patch the same file. For example
a diff with patches to Makefile, des/Makefile, usr.bin/Makefile would attempt
to patch Makefile three times.
