Re: Linux kernel 2.1.73 released
Sun, 21 Dec 1997 00:40:08 +0100

On Fri, Dec 19, 1997 at 09:58:00PM +0100, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:

> I guess George means, why is the file _both_ in the patch and in 2.1.72?

It isn't. 2.1.72 creates the file in the wrong place, 2.1.73 moves it to
the right place.

> When patching from 2.1.72 to 2.1.73, I get:
> The next patch would create the file `linux/include/linux/dmascc.h',
> which already exists! Assume -R? [n]
> Apply anyway? [n]
> Skipping patch.
> 1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving rejects to linux/include/linux/dmascc.h.rej
> So, I editted the reject file to remove the patch stuff (s/^..//) and
> then:
> $ diff -u dmascc.h
> $
> No difference between the 2.1.72 version and the version included in
> the 2.1.73 patch.

Nope, the patch applies without rejects. I assume you are using a newer
version of patch than 2.1. These versions occasionally seem not to be
able to apply apparently correct patches.

> Hmm, apparently nobody uses the patches anymore but just downloads
> complete kernels. Strange.

I don't think so. I'm using a patched source tree since 1.1.35 or so; I
only occasionally download a full tree to make shure my tree doesn't contain
accidental derivations. Probably most other developers are doing the
same thing.