linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Process: Add a note about git way of applying patch

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8734zq3yjh.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Date:   Thu, 07 Sep 2023 07:25:54 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@...il.com>
Cc:     workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jesper.juhl@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Process: Add a note about git way of
 applying patch

Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@...il.com> writes:

> On 06:48 Thu 07 Sep 2023, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@...il.com> writes:
>>
>>> cc: jesper.juhl@...il.com
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bhaskar Chowdhury <unixbhaskar@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>  Documentation/process/applying-patches.rst | 7 +++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/applying-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/applying-patches.rst
>>> index c269f5e1a0a3..201b9900bffe 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/process/applying-patches.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/process/applying-patches.rst
>>> @@ -6,6 +6,13 @@ Applying Patches To The Linux Kernel
>>>  Original by:
>>>  	Jesper Juhl, August 2005
>>>
>>> +
>>> +.. applying patch by Git::
>>> +
>>> +    You can use the below syntax to patch in git repository
>>> +    git-apply --whitespace=error-all <patchfile>
>>> +
>>> +
>>>  .. note::
>>>
>>>     This document is obsolete.  In most cases, rather than using ``patch``
>>
>>So why are you sending a patch ... with no changelog
>
> My bad. Realized it once send it.
>
>
>>to a document that is explicitly marked as being obsolete?
>
> I thought if people visit that page , that note might help.
>
> Are we taking out that page from the doc? Why that page is still there?

I would happily remove it, but ran into resistance (a few years ago)
when I suggested it.

Thanks,

jon