Re: [RFC] patch's default backup behavior

On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 11:59 AM Rodney W. Grimes
<freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>
> > Am Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 10:25:08PM -0500 schrieb Kyle Evans:
> > > I'd like to test the waters on switching this to the GNU behavior,
> > > which feels a whole lot more reasonable. Notably, they'll only create
> > > backup files if a mismatch was detected (presumably this means either
> > > a hunk needed fuzz or a hunk outright failed). This yields far fewer
> > > backup files in the ideal scenario (context entirely matches), while
> > > still leaving backup files when it's sensible (base file changed and
> > > we might want to regenerate the patch).
> > >
> > > Thoughts / comments / concerns?
> >
> > Personally, I'm more often annoyed by the GNU behavior than not.
> > Especially when working on pkgsrc, the GNU behavior of
> > sometimes-not-creating-backups actually breaks tooling. I also consider
> > the rationale somewhat fishy as tools like sed have historically not
> > operated in-place.
>
> Personally, if YOU like the behavior of gnu patch, by all means,
> please USE gnu patch.  Please do NOT make bsd patch behave in
> a different manner simply because you personally like that
> other behavior.
>
> If you want the stuff to look like Linux/GNU by all means,
> go RUN linux/gnu!!!!
>

Your response is completely missing the point, and could have been omitted.

Thanks,

Kyle Evans