Re: [RFC] patch's default backup behavior
- Reply: Kyle Evans : "Re: [RFC] patch's default backup behavior"
- In reply to: Kyle Evans : "[RFC] patch's default backup behavior"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2022 03:41:44 UTC
On Fri, Apr 8, 2022, 9:26 PM Kyle Evans <email@example.com> wrote: > Hello! > > FreeBSD's patch follows historical patch(1) behavior w.r.t. backups, > where a backup is created for every file patched. > > I'd like to test the waters on switching this to the GNU behavior, > which feels a whole lot more reasonable. Notably, they'll only create > backup files if a mismatch was detected (presumably this means either > a hunk needed fuzz or a hunk outright failed). This yields far fewer > backup files in the ideal scenario (context entirely matches), while > still leaving backup files when it's sensible (base file changed and > we might want to regenerate the patch). > > Thoughts / comments / concerns? Cross-posted this to a couple of > different lists to try and hit the largest number of stakeholders in > patch(1) behavior. > Could one select the old behavior? Or would it just be a change? A new -V value? I like the Idea. Warner Thanks, > > Kyle Evans > >