John Marino <netbsd%marino.st@localhost> writes: > On 6/7/2012 00:05, Thomas Klausner wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:57:48PM +0200, John Marino wrote: >>> I don't think this policy is a good idea. Patches have revisions, >>> and you don't (normally) revise a patch with an editor. You >>> regenerate it with pkgdiff, and when that happens the previous >>> comment is lost. >> >> AFAIK that's incorrect. pkgdiff keeps comments. In case it doesn't, >> that's a bug. Have you seen this happening? >> Thomas > > I must be using it wrong, although I don't know how pkgdiff is can > retain the comment. > > Basically: > 1) apply patch, which results in patched file and .orig file > 2) change patched file as desired > 3) use pkgdiff with updated patched file and .orig file > > I don't see where pkgdiff gets the access to the original comment to > pass to stdout this way. I run pkgdiff with no arguments, and it updates the patch files in patches/. As far as I can tell it replaces the hunks and keeps the leading comments.
Attachment:
pgpfr8L3UDWfy.pgp
Description: PGP signature