On Feb 17, 2015, at 6:36 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > > "Dan Langille (dalangil)" <dalan...@cisco.com> writes: > >>> On Jan 20, 2015, at 7:22 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >>> >>> "Dan Langille (dalangil)" <dalan...@cisco.com> writes: >>> >>>> I did not test this patch. Is that holding up a commit? >>> >>> I am hoping that you rebuilt the Git you use with this patch by the >>> time you wrote the message I am responding to and have been using it >>> for your daily Git needs ;-) >>> >>> I believe it is queued on the 'next' branch so that others like you >>> who need the change can verify the improvements, and others unlike >>> you who do not need the change can make sure the change does not >>> cause unintended consequences. >> >> Is this the patch in question? >> >> https://github.com/git/git/commit/4dbe66464b4fd695c5989cc272fa0edd6475037c >> >> I ask because previous versions of the patch acted against http.h as >> well and my failure with it. >> >> Could I expect that patch work against 2.3.0? >> >> It applies cleanly, compiles, but cores when I try a ‘git clone’. >> Unmatched 2.3.0 succeeds. > > It already is in 'master', so please holler if things break with > that version.
I just built from ‘master’, on FreeBSD 9.3: cd ~/src git clone https://github.com/git/git.git cd git gmake Then tried ~/src/git/git clone https://OUR_REPO It cores too, and I see: git-remote-https.core — Dan Langille Infrastructure & Operations Talos Group Sourcefire, Inc.
