From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13021 invoked by alias); 22 Jun 2009 04:42:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 13010 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Jun 2009 04:42:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_37,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:42:34 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1MIbMV-0000AD-Bu; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:42:31 -0400 From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker CC: vladimir@codesourcery.com, chgenly@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20090622031832.GA7766@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:18:32 -0700) Subject: Re: gdb.texinfo patch for -var-list-children (2) Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20090622031832.GA7766@adacore.com> Message-Id: Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:42:00 -0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00559.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:18:32 -0700 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: Vladimir Prus , Chris Genly , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > > > I suggest you use unified diffs for patches (cvs diff -u). The > > > default "context" format is some historically-inflicted thing that > > > is hard to read. > > > > I'm fine with both context and unified diffs. > > That's very kind of you to accept context diffs, but I do feel that > most reviewers are more comfortable with unified diffs - so I suggest > we keep asking for unified for future patches. I, for one, cannot > read context diffs. I usually don't ask a resend, and convert the patch > from one format to the next, but I like to ask that future patches > be in unified format. I'm surprised by such strong feelings, since the difference between context and unified diffs is not so large. Anyway, all GNU projects I ever contributed to accept both context and unified diffs, and in fact so does GDB, because gdb/CONTRIBUTE says this: o Submitting Patches [...] The patch itself. If you are accessing the CVS repository use "cvs update; cvs diff -cp"; else, use "diff -cp OLD NEW" or "diff -up OLD NEW". If your version of diff does not support these options, then get the latest version of GNU diff. So if from now on we are going to request only unified diffs, we should at least change this text. FWIW, I don't think we should change this policy because it may prove inconvenient in some situations (e.g., the Patch utility produces reject files in context diff format). But that's me.