On Sat, Jul 02, 2022 at 10:22:30PM +0200, Omar Polo wrote:
> Stefan Sperling <stsp@stsp.name> wrote:
> >  	@@ -295,7 +305,7 @@ hunk contains mangled whitespace
> 
> I like the idea!  Diff belows keeps the behavior, drops -w and adds this
> visual aid.  I've added it with a lower precedence, so if a hunk is
> applied at a different offset _and_ with mangled whitespaces only the
> "applied at offset" info will be printed.
> 
> We avoid adding a flag, love it :)

Sure. Less options is better.
 
> Rather than a flag specific for whitespaces, a "strict mode" that
> considers an error a non-perfect application of the diff seems more
> useful.

Makes sense. ok stsp, with two nits below:

> diff refs/heads/main refs/heads/pw
> commit - f5b0315f0e07bfd36a4eb37d91884fcd8614745a
> commit + 393c10527c09d54aa19c1f121b2cc74c31ac4746
> blob - d2db3f11b55b0dcd7008e9f4662210887aa2742b
> blob + a79c8a428a21ddd30f49aa132dd4457a73135fa1
> --- got/got.1
> +++ got/got.1
> @@ -1347,6 +1347,9 @@ If a change does not match at its exact line number, a
>  apply it somewhere else in the file if a good spot can be found.
>  Otherwise, the patch will fail to apply.
>  .Pp
> +Whitespaces may be ignored when trying to match the context of a
> +change, as they may have been mangled.
> +.Pp

Are you sure this is worth documenting? Diffs with some whitespace
issues should now "just work", and we already print a hint about it
during regular operation. People will expect that 'got patch' will do
its best to make sense of the provided input. They won't look into the
man page to check details about whitespace before trying to apply a patch.

Once we add a 'strict' mode, that would be a good place to document
this. We will need to explain how behaviour changes in strict mode, and
should then of course mention differences in treatment of whitespace.

> +		else
> +			printf("hunk contains mangled whitespaces\n");

The above should say just "whitespace" (singular), not "whitespaces".

> +	echo 'M  hello.c' > $testroot/stdout.expected
> +	echo '@@ -5,5 +5,5 @@ hunk contains mangled whitespaces' \

And of course the test would need the same change here.