On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Warren Young <w...@etr-usa.com> wrote:
> It isn’t really a hash since it isn’t computed from the contents of the > artifact. It’s just a random number, expressed as a long hex string. It > *looks* like a hash, but it isn’t. Proof: > > cd ~/tmp > f new ../x.fossil > f new ../y.fossil > f open ../x.fossil > touch foo > f add foo > f ci -m . > f close > f open ../y.fossil > f add foo > f ci -m . > f close > > Notice that the “hashes” change value in both identical cases: the project > codes are different, the initial checkout ID is different, and the checkin > ID for “foo” in both cases is different, even though it hasn’t changed in > any way. The commit ID really is a hash. It is the hash of the manifest artifact. The manifest's 'D Card' has the date/time stamp of the commit. Also, the manifest's 'P card' refers to the parent commit(s). Therefore, the commit IDs of otherwise identical child commits will be different. The 'foo' artifacts in the 2 repos, however, should have the same artifact IDs,
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
