From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8051216D32C for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:04:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713470702; cv=none; b=sUfiHk6dhdV0B5mkOuK8VDycl6v4LvSnt6+RiOrz4xsuX5cOPEBF5VvUyY9f4kGxLruJaZ8NhrP8Vlel1SmYfPPBUBiR3aC14306dJnucBZzxjVR+EEtOqCN6k8Xf0s+Oaf9tEd57tELRQu/a5LFCNQEy6KDge/bxT444cXJqwU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713470702; c=relaxed/simple; bh=l3umERYbRBQE4760lrTBZSbpTCcTPimlJlPCj5V57W4=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=uZQL7ZhQ7N6oix8QzZy8HyTydCwGecIgTG6iXYjfAT023TKmBTO7nnTGs+9EepiJKiqpwKyzf+yX2taT8MzpewsxbDJkRn4f5CGWI4JxfH+jTPdwsPkOr7kcZIS40IGe2kYT0do5u6k5+HqS4SkbEXAOI0p90Ss4Iyd21Y8VQs4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=Y5yqe6o5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="Y5yqe6o5" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1713470697; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qNovI5Iy4vT37IDr9WgwOVfbRCN/dJPgX59HdAVNH54=; b=Y5yqe6o5OQdmML0EkcGkH/aACNsnJQnf/59nYWIGMUKYRWuqc2g9phurKtV9NQnspL27G1 7MD57PBf0MPNA0ezGUHTgw8AGwkzXzzkCt4nHH4WjPIfSNi3HrAeeFqsCUipMyvQzU/uX/ hFzWaAN0VlXGMyCZ+zYALR/X+b4hxsD8xnzu0Oc5Jp4Fg1JymWEWKIVMTE/gRzA62Y+8kR lJG2KMZIiYWzj3LFZaHu132bTtg3w4yzP+0rGi/AdVwMl5jT5flVden7XJr4c4WwZG2DbE gMuRQBtPiNpKG/XXHVZSCX3sg2pXydpQwRrgFB/FhDywWnz5Xh9MiwzuAplT4w== Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:04:57 +0200 From: Dragan Simic To: Eric Sunshine Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] format-patch: new --resend option for adding "RESEND" to patch subjects In-Reply-To: References: <1d9c6ce3df714211889453c245485d46b43edff6.1713324598.git.dsimic@manjaro.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org Hello Eric, On 2024-04-17 09:05, Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2024-04-17 08:35, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:33 PM Dragan Simic >> wrote: >>> diff --git a/builtin/log.c b/builtin/log.c >>> @@ -2111,7 +2116,9 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char >>> **argv, const char *prefix) >>> if (keep_subject && subject_prefix) >>> - die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used >>> together"), "--subject-prefix/--rfc", "-k"); >>> + die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used >>> together"), "--subject-prefix/--rfc/--resend", "-k"); >> >> You probably want to be using die_for_incompatible_opt4() from >> parse-options.h here. > > Thanks for the suggestion. Frankly, I haven't researched the > available options, assuming that the current code uses the right > option. Of course, I'll have a detailed look into it. Unfortunately, die_for_incompatible_opt3() cannot be used because it also prevents the --subject-prefix and --rfc options from being used together, which is expected to be possible. >> (And you may want a preparatory patch which fixes the preimage to use >> die_for_incompatible_opt3() for --subject-prefix, --rfc, and -k >> exclusivity, though that may be overkill.) > > I'm not really sure what to do. Maybe the other reviewers would > prefer an orthogonal approach instead? Maybe that would be better > for bisecting later, if need arises for that?