From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 39142 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2015 10:39:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 39123 invoked by uid 89); 18 Jun 2015 10:39:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:39:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98AA92EB64F; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:39:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t5IAdZmA004786; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 06:39:36 -0400 Message-ID: <55829FE7.1060908@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:39:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans , Jan Kratochvil CC: Patrick Palka , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Sync readline to version 6.3 patchlevel 8 References: <1431562331-20448-1-git-send-email-patrick@parcs.ath.cx> <20150516152514.GA12510@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00381.txt.bz2 On 05/16/2015 04:51 PM, Doug Evans wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Jan Kratochvil > wrote: >> On Sat, 16 May 2015 17:23:23 +0200, Doug Evans wrote: >>> Another thought is that IWBN if the reapplication of local patches was >>> a separate commit. >> >> IIUC this would break git bisect. > > It might. Bleah. > > What's the "git" way to do this (*1) that doesn't involve a lot of > manual effort? > --- > (*1): "this" being extracting out individual local patches later in > time (say a year from now). I guess that would be a git merge of the branch that contains the local patches. We don't allow merge commits in our repo though. I think that easiest next best is to put the unsquashed application of the local patches in a branch (just like users/ppalka/readline-6.3-update), and apply the squashed version to master. For the next update, we can find the initial local patches in the branch. Thanks, Pedro Alves