X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s= default; b=tlGFoIb47IJ0nUnt0kdcaxl1P1uICA8ERV0YhWQ5fzVnQ2J0Qnp4+ B3YAzxA3LxdpDhnE3CFVwsQn9ohlqf/l26K534KWM9b/VVJsEhJj7cHSmg8dY+gg nrDml7auhtbO6rkOHxx+vjvlPgfVm5+nTTmszxtB7M0AcmyZasA4+c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=DO7MqBe4NDdf2QUbtWFHmVDvuxQ=; b=yL8ZraaxEbj0tmX1kVMnVwYdTd8K 1J+vus8GvmBfEBpyHROO6P1RLYFZUByl+op745EKnrPXeXbhHROtsD8gpIrA15mC 2/ghrIR8ryAaCTZ9X460dmBslREQoqDaF4sMbDQtWmo4bh9YjHxl/NOq7JJ/IXCN B+irnkBfi0MCvSU= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 09:46:38 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Bug with Cygwin's 'quilt' is actually in 'patch' Message-ID: <20130620074638.GD22578@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <51BFEB6E DOT 2040404 AT codespunk DOT com> <51BFF1F9 DOT 4040205 AT codespunk DOT com> <51C277A4 DOT 20709 AT codespunk DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51C277A4.20709@codespunk.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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