From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19595 invoked by alias); 21 Jun 2013 17:00:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 19585 invoked by uid 89); 21 Jun 2013 17:00:52 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from p3plsmtpa11-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (HELO p3plsmtpa11-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) (68.178.252.109) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:00:51 +0000 Received: from [10.0.1.102] ([68.9.29.195]) by p3plsmtpa11-08.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with id r50o1l00C4CauTG0150pf4; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:00:49 -0700 Message-ID: <51C486BF.8020708@codespunk.com> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:06:00 -0000 From: "Matt D." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120306 Thunderbird/3.1.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Bug with Cygwin's 'quilt' is actually in 'patch' References: <51BFEB6E.2040404@codespunk.com> <51BFF1F9.4040205@codespunk.com> <51C277A4.20709@codespunk.com> <20130620074638.GD22578@calimero.vinschen.de> <20130621121154.GA7362@calimero.vinschen.de> In-Reply-To: <20130621121154.GA7362@calimero.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00576.txt.bz2 Thank you. I took the time to make certain that I couldn't find any other lingering problems. The update to 2.7.1 corrects the test case I submitted previously. Thanks! :) On 6/21/2013 8:11 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jun 20 09:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Jun 19 23:31, Matt D. wrote: >>> I've been looking further into this and it appears as though the >>> problem is in 'patch' not 'quilt'. quilt is actually a collection of >>> bash scripts and calls patch to do the actual patching. >>> >>> Using the same example I provided earlier in the thread, the same >>> error occurs when calling patch directly: >>> >>> $ patch Imakefile patches/test.patch >>> >>> Running dos2unix on test.patch will allow the patch to apply >>> successfully. However, this is WRONG. Imakefile and the initially >>> created test.patch both use CRLF line endings. The patch should >>> definitely NOT apply by introducing actual disparity. >>> >>> To summarize, the patch to Imakefile (CRLF) will apply if it is >>> converted to LF line endings. Using the '--binary' switch seems to >>> be a workaround for this issue. >> >> I can reproduce this problem on 32 bit Cygwin but not on 64 bit Cygwin. >> >> The 64 bit version has a newer patch version 2.7.1, while I so far >> neglected to update the 32 bit version which is still on 2.6.1. I'll >> build a new patch 2.7.1 for 32 bit today. I hope that fixes it for >> 32 bit as well. Stay tuned for the announcement. > > Matt? Ping? Does the new patch 2.7.1 help? > > > Thanks, > Corinna > -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple