On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Paul Bolle <pebolle(a)tiscali.nl> wrote:
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 16:28 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> So if you want to use git apply instead of patch, I have no objections
> that I can remember. It'll just require some extra work to make sure
> the git repo actually exists and that doesn't break other things.
Git apply doesn't need a git repo. It is designed to be a patch replacement.
Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Seems odd?
(There's probably a lot of legacy stuff patch handles that
doesn't, but no-one cares.)
True, but I guess I wonder why they bothered designing a patch
replacement to begin with.