Re: [bug-patch] RFE: --batch-skip

[Bruce Korb]

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Andreas Grünbacher <address@hidden> wrote:
> So which part of the behavior of --force is it that you don't want?

       -f  or  --force
          Assume  that  the user knows exactly what he or she is doing, and do
          not ask any questions.  [...] files even though they have the wrong
          version for the Prereq: line in the patch; and assume  that  patches
          are  not reversed even if they look like they are.

I am looking for "normal" behavior where the answers to the prompts
is always the default:  No.
but the question is never asked.

Maybe add an option:  --assume={yes,no}

> 2013/9/6 Bruce Korb <address@hidden>:
>> I am working in a situation where I have an automatable task that
>> includes patching a bunch of files.  However, I do not know apriori
>> whether or not a particular patch has already been applied.
>> If I use the patch option, "--batch" it assumes (incorrectly)
>> that I want to reverse the patch.  If I don't use the option,
>> then it reads from /dev/tty, making the whole thing interactive
>> instead of being an automated script.
>>
>> So there really need to be four modes of operation:
>>
>> force -- do the best you can
>> batch -- approximately the same, but apply in reverse if
>>          it seems like it might be reversed
>> cautious-batch -- silently quit if anything looks awry
>>          do *not* query /dev/tty for anything.
>> otherwise -- ask /dev/tty about anything unusual
>>
>> patch forthcoming, unless shouted down.
>>