[PATCH] Documentation: Small applying-patches.txt update
Minor update to Documentation/applying-patches.txt Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
44fce35f29
commit
90f2447d08
|
@ -2,7 +2,8 @@
|
|||
Applying Patches To The Linux Kernel
|
||||
------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
(Written by Jesper Juhl, August 2005)
|
||||
Original by: Jesper Juhl, August 2005
|
||||
Last update: 2005-12-02
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -118,7 +119,7 @@ wrong.
|
|||
|
||||
When patch encounters a change that it can't fix up with fuzz it rejects it
|
||||
outright and leaves a file with a .rej extension (a reject file). You can
|
||||
read this file to see exactely what change couldn't be applied, so you can
|
||||
read this file to see exactly what change couldn't be applied, so you can
|
||||
go fix it up by hand if you wish.
|
||||
|
||||
If you don't have any third party patches applied to your kernel source, but
|
||||
|
@ -127,7 +128,7 @@ and have made no modifications yourself to the source files, then you should
|
|||
never see a fuzz or reject message from patch. If you do see such messages
|
||||
anyway, then there's a high risk that either your local source tree or the
|
||||
patch file is corrupted in some way. In that case you should probably try
|
||||
redownloading the patch and if things are still not OK then you'd be advised
|
||||
re-downloading the patch and if things are still not OK then you'd be advised
|
||||
to start with a fresh tree downloaded in full from kernel.org.
|
||||
|
||||
Let's look a bit more at some of the messages patch can produce.
|
||||
|
@ -180,9 +181,11 @@ wish to apply.
|
|||
|
||||
Are there any alternatives to `patch'?
|
||||
---
|
||||
Yes there are alternatives. You can use the `interdiff' program
|
||||
(http://cyberelk.net/tim/patchutils/) to generate a patch representing the
|
||||
differences between two patches and then apply the result.
|
||||
Yes there are alternatives.
|
||||
|
||||
You can use the `interdiff' program (http://cyberelk.net/tim/patchutils/) to
|
||||
generate a patch representing the differences between two patches and then
|
||||
apply the result.
|
||||
This will let you move from something like 2.6.12.2 to 2.6.12.3 in a single
|
||||
step. The -z flag to interdiff will even let you feed it patches in gzip or
|
||||
bzip2 compressed form directly without the use of zcat or bzcat or manual
|
||||
|
@ -197,7 +200,7 @@ do the additional steps since interdiff can get things wrong in some cases.
|
|||
Another alternative is `ketchup', which is a python script for automatic
|
||||
downloading and applying of patches (http://www.selenic.com/ketchup/).
|
||||
|
||||
Other nice tools are diffstat which shows a summary of changes made by a
|
||||
Other nice tools are diffstat which shows a summary of changes made by a
|
||||
patch, lsdiff which displays a short listing of affected files in a patch
|
||||
file, along with (optionally) the line numbers of the start of each patch
|
||||
and grepdiff which displays a list of the files modified by a patch where
|
||||
|
@ -258,7 +261,7 @@ $ patch -p1 -R < ../patch-2.6.11.1 # revert the 2.6.11.1 patch
|
|||
# source dir is now 2.6.11
|
||||
$ patch -p1 < ../patch-2.6.12 # apply new 2.6.12 patch
|
||||
$ cd ..
|
||||
$ mv linux-2.6.11.1 inux-2.6.12 # rename source dir
|
||||
$ mv linux-2.6.11.1 linux-2.6.12 # rename source dir
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The 2.6.x.y kernels
|
||||
|
@ -433,7 +436,11 @@ $ cd ..
|
|||
$ mv linux-2.6.12-mm1 linux-2.6.13-rc3-mm3 # rename the source dir
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
This concludes this list of explanations of the various kernel trees and I
|
||||
hope you are now crystal clear on how to apply the various patches and help
|
||||
testing the kernel.
|
||||
This concludes this list of explanations of the various kernel trees.
|
||||
I hope you are now clear on how to apply the various patches and help testing
|
||||
the kernel.
|
||||
|
||||
Thank you's to Randy Dunlap, Rolf Eike Beer, Linus Torvalds, Bodo Eggert,
|
||||
Johannes Stezenbach, Grant Coady, Pavel Machek and others that I may have
|
||||
forgotten for their reviews and contributions to this document.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue