Re: bash40-011 patch can't be applied cleanly

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Wed, 11/18/09, Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> wrote:

> From: Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
> Subject: Re: bash40-011 patch can't be applied cleanly
> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <sergstesh@yahoo.com>
> Cc: bug-bash@gnu.org, chet.ramey@case.edu
> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 6:35 PM
> Sergei Steshenko wrote:
> 
> > As one can see, patches before the one in question
> were cleanly applied.
> > 
> > Could you please fix it ?
> 
> $ cd bash-4.0
> $ for f in {01..35}; do echo bash40-0$f: ; patch -p0 <
> ../bash-4.0-patches/bash40-0$f; done
> bash40-001:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-002:
> patching file pcomplete.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-003:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-004:
> patching file builtins/exit.def
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-005:
> patching file builtins/declare.def
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-006:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-007:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file arrayfunc.c
> patching file subst.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-008:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-009:
> patching file builtins/read.def
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-010:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-011:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-012:
> patching file execute_cmd.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-013:
> patching file subst.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-014:
> patching file builtins/fc.def
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-015:
> patching file sig.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-016:
> patching file trap.c
> patching file execute_cmd.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-017:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-018:
> patching file lib/sh/winsize.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-019:
> patching file jobs.c
> patching file jobs.h
> patching file trap.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-020:
> patching file lib/readline/readline.h
> patching file lib/readline/display.c
> patching file lib/readline/terminal.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-021:
> patching file lib/readline/display.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-022:
> patching file parse.y
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-023:
> patching file lib/readline/display.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-024:
> patching file lib/glob/glob.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-025:
> patching file lib/glob/glob.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-026:
> patching file externs.h
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-027:
> patching file lib/readline/display.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-028:
> patching file subst.c
> patching file doc/bash.1
> patching file doc/bashref.texi
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-029:
> patching file variables.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-030:
> patching file bashline.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-031:
> patching file arrayfunc.c
> patching file variables.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-032:
> patching file subst.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-033:
> patching file builtins/read.def
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-034:
> patching file lib/glob/glob.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> bash40-035:
> patching file pcomplete.c
> patching file patchlevel.h
> $
> 
> -- 
> ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' -
> Chaucer
>          ``Ars
> longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
> Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    chet@case.edu 
>   http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
> 

My script was applying patches from 'bash-4.0-patches' directory, not from
'bash-4.0' one, and maybe this was my mistake.

Anyway, patches before 'bash40-011' applied, i.e. there is probably a way of 
forming patches in a manner that allows to apply them "symmetrically".

...

Yes, I have just changed the script to apply patches while being in the
build directory, not patches directory, and it works now - for both
'readline' and 'bash'.

Sorry for the noise and confusion.

Is there a reliable mechanism to avoid such mistakes ? Say, a 'patch'
command line switch which removes the flexibility of applying a patch from
patches directory ? I'd prefer the utility to tell me about my mistakes
right away and not after 10 first patches.

Thanks,
  Sergei.