Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Paul Arthur <junk+usenet@×××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Establishing Gentoo patch policy to keep our patches consistent and clean
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2013 20:40:39
Message-Id: slrnkm11jf.2fi.junk+usenet@shasta.marwnad.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Establishing Gentoo patch policy to keep our patches consistent and clean by "Paweł Hajdan
1 On 2013-04-06, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. <phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote:
2
3 > On 4/6/13 11:08 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote:
4 >
5 >> 1. Patches have to be either in unified or context diff format.
6 >> Unified diff is preferred.
7 >
8 > Are there any other formats than unified and context diff? If not,
9 > it'd be like another "for indoor or outdoor use only" or "home or
10 > office use" - i.e. no need to explicitly list all possible options.
11
12 Yes.
13
14 Unified:
15 --- test- 2013-04-06 16:27:07.000000000 -0400
16 +++ test 2013-04-06 16:27:22.000000000 -0400
17 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
18 0
19 1
20 2
21 -3
22 +2
23 4
24 5
25
26 Context:
27 *** test- Sat Apr 6 16:27:07 2013
28 --- test Sat Apr 6 16:27:22 2013
29 ***************
30 *** 1,6 ****
31 0
32 1
33 2
34 ! 3
35 4
36 5
37 --- 1,6 ----
38 0
39 1
40 2
41 ! 2
42 4
43 5
44
45 Normal:
46 4c4
47 < 3
48 ---
49 > 2
50
51 ed script:
52 4c
53 2
54 .
55
56 RCS format:
57 d4 1
58 a4 1
59 2
60
61 --
62 [T]he only virtue it had was that the CD-ROM did not generally on physical
63 contact explode to drive high-velocity metallic shards laden with radioactive
64 weaponized anthrax spores through the local postal code.
65 --Joseph Nebus in RASFW, on SimCity 3000