Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] eapply: Drop -s option for patch.

[Mike Gilbert]

On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 8:52 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2019-12-13 at 08:47 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 3:15 PM Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2019, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > > > I think this should be reverted. It causes too much noise, and
> > > > "solves" a problem only very rarely.
> > >
> > > Now, how many lines of output does this typically produce, compared
> > > to the total size of a typical build log? Especially with mgorny's
> > > subsequent modification, which suppresses the output unless the patch
> > > doesn't apply cleanly.
> >
> > In most cases, I would be inclined to simply ignore the patch output
> > since there's really no need for me to take any action on it.
> >
> > On the other hand, it makes it more difficult to quickly identify the
> > list of patches being applied if there is junk output in the middle of
> > the list.
> >
> > > It was also suggested that we add -F0 in EAPI 8, but that would break
> > > the build in those cases that are producing extra output now. I don't
> > > think that would be preferable.
> >
> > I am opposed to including such a change in EAPI 8. It would make
> > ebuild maintenance more difficult for everyone, and I don't think the
> > potential benefit is worth it.
>
> ...and why do we consider it correct to apply patches when the context
> doesn't match?  If our only goal is to make things 'easier' for
> 'everyone', then we could just pass -F9999 and ignore all the context.
>
> Though I don't understand why include any context in the first place if
> you don't care about it matching.  Sounds like a waste of space to me!

The patch command defaults to -F2. If that makes no sense, why is it
the upstream default?