ok, i take it back -- i *am* still confused by patch -force

Christopher K. Johnson ckjohnson at gwi.net
Sat Nov 15 21:50:06 UTC 2003


Robert P. J. Day wrote:

>  ok, i finally narrowed down what my issue with patch was.  let's say
>that i have the absolute name of a patch file, $PATCH, and the absolute
>name of a directory, $DIR, in which that patch should be applied (with
>-p1, it turns out).  what will work nicely is:
>
>  $ patch -d $DIR -p1 < $PATCH
>
>what will *not* work is:
>
>  $ patch -d $DIR -force -p1 < $PATCH
>
>now, before you all point out the obvious typo (it should be either
>"-f" or "--force", not "-force"),  what happens is that *no* warning
>is given, and patch appears to run normally, assuring me that, yes,
>files are all being patched properly, when in fact, nothing of the sort
>is happening.
>
>  argh.
>
>rday
>
>
>--
>fedora-list mailing list
>fedora-list at redhat.com
>http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
>
>  
>
Single character options can be stacked.
So just as one can do
    ls -l -r
or
    ls -lr
one can combine the "patch -f -o" as "patch -fo".

And if you look you will find there is a newly created file named "rce" 
which contains the patched output.  That is because the -o option takes 
a following token as the output file, so "patch -force" is the same as 
"patch -f -o rce"

There was no error because you specified valid, albeit undesirable, options.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
   "Spend less!  Do more!  Go Open Source..." -- Dirigo.net
   Chris Johnson, RHCE #807000448202021






More information about the fedora-list mailing list