On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:16:49AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
>
>> > 2. To get our landing page and list of projects in order (and also
>> > micro-projects for applicants). This can probably build on the
>> > previous round at:
On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 3:35:57 PM MST Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> * mk/use-size-t-in-zlib (2017-08-10) 1 commit
> . zlib.c: use size_t for size
>
> The wrapper to call into zlib followed our long tradition to use
> "unsigned long" for sizes of regions in memory, which have been
>
Hi Wesley,
On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 11:38 PM, Wesley Schwengle wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've made some progress with the hook.d implementation. It isn't
> finished, as it is my first C project I'm still somewhat rocky with
> how pointers and such work, but I'm getting somewhere. I haven't
> broken any
Hi all,
I've made some progress with the hook.d implementation. It isn't
finished, as it is my first C project I'm still somewhat rocky with
how pointers and such work, but I'm getting somewhere. I haven't
broken any tests \o/.
You have a nice testsuite btw. Feel free to comment on the code.
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 06:26 -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
> Around the time that my proposed approaches were getting vetoed for
> alignment issues, I figured I was out of my depth here. I reached out to
> Daniel Lemire (of EWAH bitmap fame) on Twitter [1]. His blog is full of
> posts of
Index format v4 requires some more computation to assemble a path
based on a previous one. The current code is not very efficient
because
- it doubles memory copy, we assemble the final path in a temporary
first before putting it back to a cache_entry
- strbuf_remove() in
v2 removes unrelated changes and the dummy_entry. strip_len is also
replaced with copy_len to reduce repeated subtraction calculation.
Diff:
diff --git a/read-cache.c b/read-cache.c
index 5c04c8f200..8628d0f3a8 100644
--- a/read-cache.c
+++ b/read-cache.c
@@ -1713,7 +1713,7 @@ int
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 03:55:28AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> I still think the more interesting long-term thing here is to reuse the
> pack verification from index-pack, which actually hashes as it does the
> per-object countup.
>
> That code isn't lib-ified enough to be run in process, but I
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 09:37:59AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> > I also think it doesn't need to be the mentor's responsibility to find
> > the funding. That can be up to an "org admin", and I don't think it
> > should be too big a deal (I had no trouble getting funding from GitHub
> > last
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 09:53:53AM +0200, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> > At any rate, I think this perfectly explains the behavior we're seeing.
>
> Yes, this certainly make sense.
>
> For fun (and testing) I tried to take the problem in the other direction:
> * why hasn't this be detected
On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> In order to stop this from happening again, the function is now
> compiled unconditionally but exits early unless DEBUG_BISECT is
> non-zero.
Thanks for going the extra mile and doing this!
I wonder if we should also try to make the
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 03:46:57AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> Something like this, which chunks it there, uses a per-packfile meter
> (though still does not give any clue how many packfiles there are), and
> shows a throughput meter.
Actually, in typical cases it would not matter how many
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 03:24:09AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 09:12:04AM +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > diff --git a/builtin/commit.c b/builtin/commit.c
> > index 2be7bdb331..60f30b3780 100644
> > --- a/builtin/commit.c
> > +++ b/builtin/commit.c
> > @@ -432,6 +432,7 @@ static
On Sat, Sep 01, 2018 at 02:53:28PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> With this we'll get output like:
>
> $ ~/g/git/git -C ~/g/2015-04-03-1M-git/ --exec-path=$PWD fsck
> Checking object directories: 100% (256/256), done.
> Hashing: 100% (452634108/452634108), done.
>
This function only compiles when DEBUG_BISECT is 1, which is often not
the case. As a result there are two commits [1] [2] that break it but
the breakages went unnoticed because the code did not compile by
default. Update the function and include the new header file to make this
function build
On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:16:49AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
>> I can also look at getting outside funds.
>>
>> My opinion though is that it is probably better if the Git project can
>> use its own fund for this, as it makes it easier for
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 6:45 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > @@ -146,10 +147,14 @@ static void show_list(const char *debug, int counted,
> > int nr,
>
> An unrelated tangent, but I think I just spotted a bug in the
> existing code on the line immediately before this hunk, which reads
>
>
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 09:12:04AM +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > diff --git a/builtin/commit.c b/builtin/commit.c
> > index 0d9828e29e..779c5e2cb5 100644
> > --- a/builtin/commit.c
> > +++ b/builtin/commit.c
> > @@ -359,13 +359,6 @@ static const char *prepare_index(int argc, const char
> >
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 01:08:03AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 12:17:53AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
> > > Here are the steps to reproduce it:
> > > $ git clone git://github.com/lucvoo/sparse-dev.git
> > > $ cd
> > > $ git co index-corruption
> > > $
19 matches
Mail list logo
