From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53A61F47C for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 15:31:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=HsJJbS4+; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230390AbjATPbc (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:31:32 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33722 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230226AbjATPbb (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:31:31 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07506C64A for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 07:31:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id a11so8738470lfg.0 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 07:31:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fF5NClrWe/cu7Zs1wk53Qngrt5teAt90kY+bghTIxEA=; b=HsJJbS4+hQmP9ATltA/RVe+xa1Hapn4rfA7WIFzmtE2cfFc7I6sP0BiXYqCYVFdRps QQIf/hcCx7ZW+GYM8qyT0rRR5TH4EEKFXy8FaZAwdJSSf6sNAU+Cq3nV/ZScOMLhS2Cn zMS/scCGJQ9ZKno2nhTkEEF6vPj+eobZMYP/jX9ZXDCn3YY5RuES8Ru23M3DbFdBbTMs ZTLaTCthHEChx3+1rPEiCTRg0ghS6s97I66zRwmJJ04KB4VtH36WOQp3ExeNX5Wkm3cD fNaI0YQTozCBEveBFv7vwGSd6lS+c90SJZlSYd8vULbXDVjkmJfgr9V7cydDqVgu8gf1 Ojig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=fF5NClrWe/cu7Zs1wk53Qngrt5teAt90kY+bghTIxEA=; b=qVt+3J8uku560JcZimhhnY7ZgRhy75C/JNzrSXSQH6L+C440NWPIkwLKc2JnFmEpnE aGBEH4J0NzyEsDwru666J3qxEH2q6K5DIwew6Q/Pf3o+gGKE3ouBU8CsSUHRK/E9HJKw T521Gg5uVG66NyEYxb6ETwUAA/BC8SJo8TtF4D4brdyrVH5fU2mVFB4f4D9cPNY7YUiT m0Zt9I9P9dJEzo0PeQTA3y055KrzDTzINR4x1+xKcx4yhxbvSa8Hj4aINZN3er9JK0+Z YLficthb4YnutGIoEUz6nergjuFKIBF1GzZHObJH8sBS8OosDgOWIL2dRcj6RGquq7vA Tq+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kqnIicf6qgq7tEnDC/hrvC6txAe+n4Z2SRoNuiOTCAnpRM5ZUDb TUFLUZ/qJ7wzZE35nbwo42w6DZFTL4BEKJzM5jk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXvnHTvzJLh5Ye/ZDl4rzRKZKU9CPacj6gSqESjMBOn+9y/kdazbAWrjotOh5brzIFNllMQLS1vJYwYxbjrgUsQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3e11:b0:4cb:d46:94b7 with SMTP id i17-20020a0565123e1100b004cb0d4694b7mr783975lfv.405.1674228688173; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 07:31:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Elijah Newren Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 07:31:15 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] rebase: remove completely useless -C option To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 4:05 AM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" writes: > > > From: Elijah Newren > > > > The `-C` option to rebase was introduced with 67dad687ad ("add -C[NUM] > > to git-am", 2007-02-08). > > ... > > As per the git-apply documentation for the `-C` option: > > Ensure at least lines of surrounding context match...When fewer > > lines of surrounding context exist they all must match. > > > > The fact that format-patch was not passed a -U option to increase the > > number of context lines meant that there would still only be 3 lines of > > context to match on. > > I am afraid that this is only less than half true. Isn't the > intended use of -C similar to how "patch --fuzz" is used? > > That is, even when a patch does not cleanly apply with full context > in the incoming diff, by requiring *smaller* number of lines to > match, the diff *could* be forced to apply with reduced precision? Oh! Reducing the number of lines of context to pay attention to never even occurred to me for whatever reason. I'll drop the patch.