Hi Kristoffer, наб,

On 2026-02-10T16:54:02+0100, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote:

On Tue, Feb 10, 2026, at 15:30, Alejandro Colomar wrote:

quoted

Hi!

On 2026-02-10T15:17:55+0100, наб wrote:

quoted

Hi!

On Mon, Feb 09, 2026 at 11:35:53PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:

quoted

On 2026-02-07T23:00:49+0100, наб wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <redacted>

For some reason, the patch doesn't want to apply.  I don't see anything
obviously wrong, so it may be an issue in my side?

	Applying: futex_waitv.2: new page
	error: affected file 'man2/futex_waitv.2' is beyond a symbolic link
	error: man7/futex.7: does not exist in index
	Patch failed at 0001 futex_waitv.2: new page
	hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
	hint: When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
	hint: If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
	hint: To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
	hint: Disable this message with "git config set advice.mergeConflict false"
	Press any key to continue...

Hm, I did recently set
  $ git config diff.noprefix
  true
I didn't expect this to affect format-patch diffs
(since it doesn't affect diffs shown by git add -p),
or, if it did, I expected the designated consumer of format-patch
diffs (am) to understand this. perhaps not;
maybe -p0 to git am?

A quick search yields
  https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqy1o5op1i.fsf@gitster.g/t/#eaa0323ec4eed441b37caf96e1b136529b298dbac (local)
where you're in the thread and the maintainer says "queued" for a patch
that would ignore noprefix for format-patch for this reason precisely.
But clearly not, since my patches were with noprefix=true and came out -p0.

Oh, that bites again!

Junio, do you still have this queued?
<https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqy1o5op1i.fsf@gitster.g/t/#m6f42ff4f0cb2d6dd1d68f12a533d04c822b68a80 (local)>

See 15108de2 (Merge branch 'jk/format-patch-ignore-noprefix',
2023-03-21).

Ahhh, it seems that the OP is using a too-old version of git.  I saw at
the bottom of the patch 2.39.5.  But the fix was part of 2.41.0.

	$ git describe --contains ab89575387c02ea024163256826ad1c6dd2e4247
	v2.41.0-rc0~141^2

This seems reasonable.  наб, would you mind not using that flag unless
you use a recent-enough git(1) (I suspect you're on an old Debian)?  :)

	alx@devuan:~/src/linux/git/main$ git show v2.41.0 | grep ^Date
	Date:   2023-06-01 15:28:43 +0900
	Date:   2023-06-01 15:28:26 +0900
	alx@devuan:~/src/linux/git/main$ git show v2.39.5 | grep ^Date
	Date:   2024-05-30 17:22:58 -0700
	Date:   2024-05-30 16:52:52 -0700
	alx@devuan:~/src/linux/git/main$ git show v2.39.0 | grep ^Date
	Date:   2022-12-12 09:59:23 +0900
	Date:   2022-12-12 09:59:08 +0900


Have a lovely night!
Alex

An aside but `format.noprefix` is not a boolean like `diff.noprefix`.
It will be enabled with any value.

Is it standard to indicate this with the existing “If set,”, perhaps? Or
should it say “enabled with any value”?

(+Cc Peff)

    format.noprefix::
            If set, do not show any source or destination prefix in patches.
            This is equivalent to the `diff.noprefix` option used by `git
            diff` (but which is not respected by `format-patch`). Note that
            by setting this, the receiver of any patches you generate will
            have to apply them using the `-p0` option.

-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>