[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-patch] RFE: --batch-skip
From: |
Bruce Korb |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-patch] RFE: --batch-skip |
Date: |
Fri, 6 Sep 2013 15:22:21 -0700 |
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Andreas Grünbacher <address@hidden> wrote:
> So which part of the behavior of --force is it that you don't want?
-f or --force
Assume that the user knows exactly what he or she is doing, and do
not ask any questions. [...] files even though they have the wrong
version for the Prereq: line in the patch; and assume that patches
are not reversed even if they look like they are.
I am looking for "normal" behavior where the answers to the prompts
is always the default: No.
but the question is never asked.
Maybe add an option: --assume={yes,no}
> 2013/9/6 Bruce Korb <address@hidden>:
>> I am working in a situation where I have an automatable task that
>> includes patching a bunch of files. However, I do not know apriori
>> whether or not a particular patch has already been applied.
>> If I use the patch option, "--batch" it assumes (incorrectly)
>> that I want to reverse the patch. If I don't use the option,
>> then it reads from /dev/tty, making the whole thing interactive
>> instead of being an automated script.
>>
>> So there really need to be four modes of operation:
>>
>> force -- do the best you can
>> batch -- approximately the same, but apply in reverse if
>> it seems like it might be reversed
>> cautious-batch -- silently quit if anything looks awry
>> do *not* query /dev/tty for anything.
>> otherwise -- ask /dev/tty about anything unusual
>>
>> patch forthcoming, unless shouted down.
>>