[BusyBox] [patch] zcip for busybox (rfc3927)

[Rob Landley]

On Friday 29 April 2005 04:39 pm, David Brownell wrote:
> On Friday 29 April 2005 11:54 am, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Monday 18 April 2005 02:04 pm, David Brownell wrote:
> > > Here's my latest version of zcip for busybox.  I gave RFC 3927 a quick
> > > diff against the draft I used when writing this, and the only obvious
> > > technical change was renaming one of the protocol constants.
> >
> > Same problem as I mentioned to the previous guy, I'm having trouble
> > applying your patch:
>
> I don't think I noticed "previous" but that's not important ...

Messages can get delivered out of order on mailing lists when sent close 
together...

> > knoppix at ttyp3[busybox]$ patch -p1 -i ../patches/bb-zcip0418.patch
> > can't find file to patch at input line 3
> > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
>
> A "patch -p0" should do it.  SVN doesn't seem to want to
> generate "patch -p1" style patches by default, and I don't
> use it enough to have tried to find out how to improve it ...
>
> > Care to send one in standard kernel patch format?
>
> If it were a kernel patch, no problem
>
> Maybe someone maybe confirm that the current procedures -- SVN
> repository, SVN generating "patch -p0" style patches, but procedures
> (including buildroot!) expecting "patch -p1" -- are in fact
> the root cause here?  Fixable either by (a) expecting "-p0" style
> patches, or (b) updating SVN?

I'm still learning my way around subversion.  I've been remiss in my duties 
towards busybox (they gave me a hammer, various things look like nails...), 
and now I'm trying to catch up.

I've scrubbed the list back to the start of the month and am trying to apply 
all those patches before looking farther backwards.

(The bug tracker is not my problem.)

> > > Patch is against current SVN tree.  At this point I'd say it's time
> > > to consider merging it into BusyBox, although I'd encourage people to
> > > test it on their networks (and submit patches!) and explore how to
> > > integrate it with mDNSResponder (etc) rather than go straight into
> > > deployments.  Embedded Linux folk, including me, have a bit of a
> > > learning curve to address with zeroconf, but it's time to start!
> >
> > Happy to.  Can't get the patch to apply.  (I've never had success typing
> > in a file to apply a patch to by hand, I'm not sure that code path even
> > works, and I haven't got time to fiddle with it right now...)
>
> A "patch -p0" should work fine.

Hey, wow.  It worked.  (I thought that was the default.  Apparently not...)

Okay, I applied 0418 and 0418b.  Let me know if it works...

Rob