Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 2, 2021 at 6:26 comment added Chan Kim Yes, patch is against the base version. To update 3.12.21 to 3.12.22, you should first reverse-apply patch-3.12.21 to make it 3.12 and then apply patch-3.12.22 to upgrade to 3.12.22.
Jun 24, 2014 at 13:06 comment added frostschutz @Ruslan: a patch is hard to beat in size; unlike a version control with full history, it can provide the final result without any intermediate steps.
Jun 23, 2014 at 11:09 comment added Ruslan How would such traffic saving scheme be better than e.g. having a git clone of the repository and doing git pull when a new version gets released?
Jun 23, 2014 at 10:21 comment added frostschutz Patches are usually for .0, e.g. VERSION = 3 PATCHLEVEL = 12 -SUBLEVEL = 0 +SUBLEVEL = 22. It would be annoying to go through 20 patches...
Jun 23, 2014 at 8:15 comment added David Richerby The part you didn't answer explicitly is, "To always patch the corresponding kernel before compiling it, or to bring a former kernel version up-to-date with the kernel that the patch matches (3.12.22, in this case)?" patch-3.12.22 is to upgrade from version 3.12.21 to .22, not to be applied to the 3.12.22 sources before compiling them.
Jun 23, 2014 at 7:27 comment added frostschutz I'm not a native speaker. But advantage sounds too weak to me somehow. Saving bandwidth/traffic is important for any server. It has purpose.
Jun 22, 2014 at 17:39 comment added David Richerby As written, this doesn't quite answer the question. To be explicit, the purpose of the patch is that applying it to version n-1 of the source "upgrades" it to version n. The advantage is that it saves a lot of traffic, as the answer describes.
Jun 22, 2014 at 12:14 vote accept Eleno
Jun 22, 2014 at 12:03 history answered frostschutz CC BY-SA 3.0