From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Filipp Gunbin Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#26028: 26.0.50; epatch for multifile patches Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 19:29:21 +0300 Message-ID: References: <87varjfzhr.fsf@yandex.ru> <838tofh93b.fsf@gnu.org> <87y3wfv3iy.fsf@yandex.ru> <871srfbyps.fsf@calancha-pc> <87efvfkx9l.fsf@drachen> <87wo07c5gb.fsf@web.de> <87v97qre46.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31912"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (darwin) Cc: 26028@debbugs.gnu.org, Arseny Sher , Tino Calancha , Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Kangas , Kaushal Modi To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu May 13 18:39:39 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEN8-00088D-FC for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 18:39:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44456 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEN5-0001rT-KU for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:39:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40690) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEDq-0003Jy-Ul for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:30:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60868) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEDq-0003sX-L0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:30:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEDq-0007tq-Fc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:30:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Filipp Gunbin Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 16:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 26028 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 26028-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B26028.162092337430309 (code B ref 26028); Thu, 13 May 2021 16:30:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 26028) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2021 16:29:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44181 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEDN-0007sn-Vx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:29:34 -0400 Original-Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:33351) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lhEDL-0007sZ-OI for 26028@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:29:33 -0400 Original-Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648015C00C1; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:29:26 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 13 May 2021 12:29:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type; s=fm3; bh=iBCL3/auF8j2XIqo6rAWHs8sBD AgyuvGQHRa5scH3YI=; b=Oac+gXb+RjvRWROgO0cmjZVcLv5KVyqKPe+Y7kR1v7 q4NKzGCGgb7gGcwNjeMDB4ns8vgXAp++Alutr+nkRy0jeucWMGZHCNjHDWpVoeDy IJn+qs838QCEvelChz6a75hOSabEa2/6HcYKo4kreQnRbyFwxspuf7hAq+oRMYUu 0BSJu2Go4Ev5+GtxIwbq0lVay/KAisqtiDOpVl1sHQr4QeDHqSqdY+VUZD+X5RA+ +D1w/IvBPETyGMxk+HETpltSVmEYubHMSLZi44zi1ECcjrePaj/mhtEempsqyxs+ Wc9u09wBklOaZCtjge0WqM3sse0y2j6lp+rfZNKrvnnw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=iBCL3/ auF8j2XIqo6rAWHs8sBDAgyuvGQHRa5scH3YI=; b=MxfB6lHACfVH9AwyDXioxY Pt5KYMFyzeLBd+POHlwTehXtM13yXzHq5rn/8zeaxsCJYk+N/wYsxxcWm2/WlXYX 03CSs8WQAK8wE3ZL1DSE8pm9I4lXMNIW6BOYt+D5DYugVQH65dHIoQWK/pP6eN0i Fi/hdr97Vov+2q1N/N466gTjIxddzjwYcC/mOuvMMW27s9GMP4p5R4JMsVxgLSkh nJ2T/FwxIVh+rCqU6Wvataxalr9sBwulYZnF1+/Xs4BKcvADt1jz7ZfVRgB6svoq 37bBi6BmOsasl/8LbZamp2se0AlBXNxJIG/BBCc3JsRxuLlgSyv2jJNCw4sjzRzQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdehgedguddtudcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffujghffgffkfggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomhephfhilhhi phhpucfiuhhnsghinhcuoehfghhunhgsihhnsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrfhhmqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedvveekffdvueevhfdutdejheekvdeufeevtedttdevuddugfeiffei veeivefhtdenucfkphepkeegrddvtdegrdduleefrddutdeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepfhhguhhnsghinhesfhgrshhtmhgr ihhlrdhfmh X-ME-Proxy: Original-Received: from fgunbin.local (unknown [84.204.193.106]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 13 May 2021 12:29:24 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87v97qre46.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Mon, 10 May 2021 14:02:17 +0200") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:206453 Archived-At: On 10/05/2021 14:02 +0200, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Michael Heerdegen writes: > >> AFAIR it solved my problem, but I can't judge whether it's ok to >> install since I don't know the code. > > The patch no longer applies cleanly -- do you have an up-to-date version > of Tino's patch in your tree, by any chance? Or did you just try it > then, and then back it out again? > > Looking at the commit history for ediff, it doesn't really look like we > have any ediff domain experts to evaluate the patch, which makes it hard > to decide whether to try to apply the patch or not. I've looked into ediff some months ago (when writing a function which opens new multifile ediff session for comparing vc commits; it's unfinished yet). So I could look at the patch if needed. Filipp