Hi Nick, I would like to thank you, since your message made me curious about git, and I started using it. After reading a little bit, I was able to install it, clone the org repository and revert the commit we were talking about (that feels good). I can now use Org normally again. I just hope it's not a very bad thing to do.
FC On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Nick Dokos <ndo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Fletcher Charest <fletcher.char...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Nick, you say you could not reproduce the bug using version > > 8.2.5h-667-g971dc4, but you did with version 8.2.5h-888-g798bb8d. Just > > out of curiosity: does the '888' in '8.2.5h-888-g798bb8d' is a number > > that is incremented chronologically? If this is correct (I'm not > > familiar with this at all), FWIW, the bug was not caused only by the > > patch '8.2.5h-888-g798bb8d', since I observed it also with version > > 8.2.5h-94-g91175a. > > > > 888 is the number of commits since the commit that was tagged > '8.2.5h'. Unfortunately, that number can be misleading: in the > face of merges, there may be multiple paths that lead from some commit > back to the tagged commit (run `gitk master' if you want to see the > multiple > paths), so the "number of commits since the tag" is ambiguous. It is > only unambiguous if the history is strictly linear. > > If you do `git log --oneline -100' on master, you'll see that there is a > merge commit d25846b that looks like this: > > ,---- > | $ git show d25846b > | commit d25846b2340e32dea93fc89ea432f74a7f64d950 > | Merge: f261833 91175a3 > | Author: Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> > | Date: Sat Mar 29 15:02:10 2014 +0100 > | > | Merge branch 'maint' > `---- > > The merge commit has two parents: f261833 and our old friend 91175a3. > > Try git describe on this commit: > > git describe d25846b > > It's only one commit ahead of 91175a3 but I get > > release_8.2.5h-873-gd25846b > > so it's 873 commits ahead of 8.2.5h, not 95! But that's because `git > describe' takes a different, much longer, path back to the tagged > commit: it follows the first parent of the merge commit. > > So I'm pretty sure that the patch that the bisection fingered is > indeed the culprit. > > I believe this is correct but if not, Achim will correct me:-) > > -- > Nick > > >
