Re: [BUG] (git commit --patch --message $MESSAGE) disallows hunk editing

Max Nanasy max.nanasy at gmail.com writes: Tested against v1.7.12.4 Confirmed in 1.8.5.2 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] upload-pack: allow shallow fetching from a read-only repository

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 02:13:03PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: Before cdab485 (upload-pack: delegate rev walking in shallow fetch to pack-objects - 2013-08-16) upload-pack does not write to the source repository. cdab485 starts to write $GIT_DIR/shallow_XX if it's a shallow fetch,

[PATCH 1/2] fetch: add a failing test for prunning with overlapping refspecs

From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me When a remote has multiple fetch refspecs and these overlap in the target namespace, fetch may prune a remote-tracking branch which still exists in the remote. The test uses a popular form of this, by putting pull requests as stored in a popular hosting

[PATCH 2/2] fetch: handle overlaping refspecs on --prune

From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than one rhs of a fetch refspec. In such a case, it is not enough to stop at the first match but look at all of the matches in order to determine whether a head is stale. To this goal,

[PATCH] shallow: verify shallow file after taking lock

Before writing the shallow file, we stat() the existing file to make sure it has not been updated since our operation began. However, we do not do so under a lock, so there is a possible race: 1. Process A takes the lock. 2. Process B calls check_shallow_file_for_update and finds no

Re: [PATCH] shallow: verify shallow file after taking lock

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:10:12AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: I also notice that check_shallow_file_for_update returns early if !is_shallow. Is that safe? Is it possible for another process to have made us shallow since the program began? In that case, we would have to stat() the file always,

[PATCH] gitk: replace SHA1 entry field on keyboard paste

We already replace old SHA with the clipboard content for the mouse paste event. It seems reasonable to do the same when pasting from keyboard. Signed-off-by: Ilya Bobyr ilya.bo...@gmail.com --- gitk-git/gitk |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: [PATCH] upload-pack: allow shallow fetching from a read-only repository

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: This is not introduced by your patch, but I notice that we do not seem to do anything with the tempfiles when the program dies prematurely. We've started collecting stale shallow_XX files in our server repos. For the writable

Re: [PATCH] shallow: verify shallow file after taking lock

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:10:12AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: I also notice that check_shallow_file_for_update returns early if !is_shallow. Is that safe? Is it possible for another process to have made us shallow since the program

Re: [PATCH 2/2] fetch: handle overlaping refspecs on --prune

On 02/27/2014 10:00 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto wrote: From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than one rhs of a fetch refspec. In such a case, it is not enough to stop at the first match but look at all of the matches in order to

Re: Compiling git for Windows

On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 12:23:35 -0600 Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com wrote: Oddly I'm not able to find any instructions on how to build Git for Windows. I've done a clone of the repository here: https://github.com/msysgit/git I did attempt to try doing it myself. I installed 'make'

[PATCH] shallow: use stat_validity to check for up-to-date file

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:18:58PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:10:12AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: I also notice that check_shallow_file_for_update returns early if !is_shallow. Is that safe? Is it

Re: An idea for git bisect and a GSoC enquiry

On 02/26/2014 09:28 AM, Jacopo Notarstefano wrote: my name is Jacopo, a student developer from Italy, and I'm interested in applying to this years' Google Summer of Code. I set my eyes on the project called git-bisect improvements, in particular the subtask about swapping the good and bad

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Matthieu Moy wrote in message vpqzjlf5q2z@anie.imag.fr: Maybe status should display a stash count if that count is 0, as this is part of the state of the repo. Maybe it would help some users, but not me for example. My main use of git stash is a safe replacement for git reset --hard:

[PATCH] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Change install_branch_config() function to use skip_prefix() for getting short name of remote branch. Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru --- branch.c | 6 -- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c index 723a36b..310749b

[PATCH] shallow: automatically clean up shallow tempfiles

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:11:41PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: We only update shallow file in these cases: clone --depth, fetch --update-shallow, fetch --depth, and push when receive.shallowupdate is set. All of them may end up not updating shallow file though. OK, that last sentence is what I

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:30:36PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: pack-kept-objects then? Hmm. That does address my point above, but somehow the word kept feels awkward to me. I'm ambivalent between the two. That word does make my backside somewhat itchy ;-) Would it help to take a

Re: [PATCH] GSoC 2014 Microproject 1 rewrite skip_prefix() as loop

On 02/26/2014 05:46 PM, Faiz Kothari wrote: I am Faiz Kothari, I am a GSoC aspirant and want to contribute to git. I am submitting the patch in reponse to Microproject 1, rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop. Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com The subject of your

Re: [PATCH] GSoC 2014 Microproject 1 rewrite skip_prefix() as loop

Thanks for the reply, I was unable to get git send-email working. Now its working, I'll resend the patch. I ran all the tests, they are working properly. About the comment, I meant, there is a similar function strbuf.c:starts_with() which does the exact same job, but it returns 0 or 1. I just

Re: [PATCH] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Dmitry, Thanks for your patch. Please see my comments below. On 02/27/2014 12:13 PM, Dmitry S. Dolzhenko wrote: Change install_branch_config() function to use skip_prefix() for getting short name of remote branch. English tweak suggestion: Change THE install_branch_config() function to use

[PATCH] rewrite skip_prefix() as loop

From: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari django@dj-pc.(none) --- git-compat-util.h |7 +-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h index cbd86c3..bb2582a 100644 --- a/git-compat-util.h +++

Re: [PATCH] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: Dmitry, Thanks for your patch. Please see my comments below. On 02/27/2014 12:13 PM, Dmitry S. Dolzhenko wrote: Change install_branch_config() function to use skip_prefix() for getting short name of remote branch. English tweak suggestion:

[PATCH] Rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop

Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- git-compat-util.h |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h index cbd86c3..4daa6cf 100644 --- a/git-compat-util.h +++ b/git-compat-util.h @@ -357,8 +357,8 @@ extern int

[PATCH] Change branch.c:install_branch_config()

Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- branch.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c index 723a36b..2fe9c05 100644 --- a/branch.c +++ b/branch.c @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int should_setup_rebase(const char *origin) void

Re: An idea for git bisect and a GSoC enquiry

- Original Message - I don't understand the benefit of adding a new command mark rather than continuing to use good, bad, plus new commands unfixed and fixed. Does this solve any problems? I think it could be interesting to allow arbitrary words here. For example, I recently walked

[PATCH v4] tag: support --sort=spec

--sort=version:refname (or --sort=v:refname for short) sorts tags as if they are versions. --sort=-refname reverses the order (with or without :version). versioncmp() is copied from string/strverscmp.c in glibc commit ee9247c38a8def24a59eb5cfb7196a98bef8cfdc, reformatted to Git coding style. The

[PATCH/RFC] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

I find myself often do git rebase -i xxx and replace one pick line with edit to amend just one commit when I see something I don't like in that commit. This happens often while cleaning up a series. This automates the replace step so it sends me straight to that commit. commit --fixup then rebase

Re: [PATCH v4] tag: support --sort=spec

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:56:52PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: --sort=version:refname (or --sort=v:refname for short) sorts tags as if they are versions. --sort=-refname reverses the order (with or without :version). versioncmp() is copied from string/strverscmp.c in glibc commit

Re: [PATCH] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Michael, Thank you for your remarks. If you look at what skip_prefix() and starts_with() do, I think you will find that you are doing too much work here. How about this one? const char *shortname = skip_prefix(remote, refs/heads/); int remote_is_branch = shortname != NULL; --

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Stephen Leake stephen_le...@stephe-leake.org writes: One _could_ argue that stashed changes are what could be reflected to the working tree and form the source of the latter, but my gut feeling is that it is a rather weak argument. At that point you

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Simon Ruderich si...@ruderich.org writes: On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 05:21:40PM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote: One easy thing to do OTOH would be to show a hint at the end of git stash pop's output, like I think that's a good idea. It makes it obvious that Git has kept the stash and that the user

Re: [PATCH v4] tag: support --sort=spec

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: You had mentioned earlier tweaking the version comparison to handle things like -rc better. I think that can come on top of this initial patch, but we should probably figure out the final sort order before including this in a

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: Omar Othman omar.oth...@booking.com writes: Though I don't know why you think this is important: Now, the real question is: when would Git stop showing this advice. I don't see a real way to answer this, and I'd rather avoid doing just a

Re: [PATCH/RFC] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com writes: I find myself often do git rebase -i xxx and replace one pick line with edit to amend just one commit when I see something I don't like in that commit. This happens often while cleaning up a series. This automates the replace step so it sends me

[PATCH] Rewrite bulk-checkin.c:finish_bulk_checkin() to use a strbuf for handling packname

Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bulk-checkin.c | 10 +- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/bulk-checkin.c b/bulk-checkin.c index 118c625..8c47d71 100644 --- a/bulk-checkin.c +++ b/bulk-checkin.c @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ static struct

[PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects Rewrite bulk-checkin.c:finish_bulk_checkin() to use a strbuf for handling packname

Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bulk-checkin.c | 10 +- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/bulk-checkin.c b/bulk-checkin.c index 118c625..e3c7fb2 100644 --- a/bulk-checkin.c +++ b/bulk-checkin.c @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ static struct

Re: An idea for git bisect and a GSoC enquiry

Hi, On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Jacopo Notarstefano jacopo.notarstef...@gmail.com wrote: Hey everyone, my name is Jacopo, a student developer from Italy, and I'm interested in applying to this years' Google Summer of Code. I set my eyes on the project called git-bisect improvements, in

[PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #5 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use hashcpy()

Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bundle.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/bundle.c b/bundle.c index e99065c..7809fbb 100644 --- a/bundle.c +++ b/bundle.c @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ static void add_to_ref_list(const unsigned char *sha1, const char

[PATCH v2] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix() for getting the short name of the remote branch. Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru --- branch.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c index 723a36b..9382e02

[PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #6 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use ALLOC_GROW()

Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bundle.c |6 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bundle.c b/bundle.c index 7809fbb..1a7b7eb 100644 --- a/bundle.c +++ b/bundle.c @@ -14,11 +14,7 @@ static const char bundle_signature[] = # v2 git bundle\n;

How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?

I'm having a long think (sickness RR) about the possible options for a narrow clone implementation. Is there currently any way in the code base that a complete sub-directory can be marked as 'missing' as could be the case for a narrow clone? The assume-unchanged/skip-worktree are close but only

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #6 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use ALLOC_GROW()

From: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bundle.c |6 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bundle.c b/bundle.c index 7809fbb..1a7b7eb 100644 --- a/bundle.c +++ b/bundle.c @@ -14,11 +14,7 @@ static const char

Re: [PATCH v3 17/25] setup.c: detect $GIT_COMMON_DIR check_repository_format_gently()

Duy Nguyen pclo...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com writes: Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com --- It is a good thing to do to read config from the real repository we are

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: Of all of them, I think --pack-kept-objects is probably the best. And I think we are hitting diminishing returns in thinking too much more on the name. :) True enough. I wonder if it makes sense to link it with pack.writebitmaps more tightly, without even

Re: GSoC idea: allow git rebase --interactive todo lines to take options

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: This seems like a reasonable feature to me. All of your examples are possible with an edit and another git command, but the convenience may be worth it (though personally, most of the examples you gave are particularly interesting

Re: [PATCH] archive: add archive.restrictRemote option

Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: From: Scott J. Goldman scot...@github.com In commit ee27ca4, we started restricting remote git-archive invocations to only accessing reachable commits. This matches what upload-pack allows, but does restrict some useful cases (e.g., HEAD:foo). We loosened

[PATCH] GSoC2014 Microproject rewrite finish_bulk_checkin()

Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com --- bulk-checkin.c | 12 +++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bulk-checkin.c b/bulk-checkin.c index 118c625..feeff9f 100644 --- a/bulk-checkin.c +++ b/bulk-checkin.c @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ static struct

Re: [PATCH v2] commit.c: use the generic sha1_pos function for lookup

Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru writes: Refactor binary search in commit_graft_pos function: use generic sha1_pos function. Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru --- Looks trivially correct; thanks. Looking at this patch makes me wonder why we have

Re: Git in GSoC 2014

Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: Sounds good. I suggest we make your blob a paragraph before the list of bullet points rather than part of the list. Please suggest some TBD* then I'll add it to the text. Would we also fill in X with the name of the actual student involved in

Re: [PATCH] rewrite skip_prefix() as loop

Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com writes: From: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com Notice that this matches From: in your e-mail message, which means it is unnecessary. Drop it. Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari django@dj-pc.(none) And make sure this matches how you call yourself above. ---

Re: [PATCH] Rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop

Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com writes: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- git-compat-util.h |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h index cbd86c3..4daa6cf 100644 --- a/git-compat-util.h +++

Re: [PATCH 2/2] fetch: handle overlaping refspecs on --prune

On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 11:21 +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: On 02/27/2014 10:00 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto wrote: From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than one rhs of a fetch refspec. In such a case, it is not enough to stop

Re: [PATCH] Rewrite bulk-checkin.c:finish_bulk_checkin() to use a strbuf for handling packname

Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com writes: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bulk-checkin.c | 10 +- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/bulk-checkin.c b/bulk-checkin.c index 118c625..8c47d71 100644 --- a/bulk-checkin.c +++ b/bulk-checkin.c @@

Re: [PATCH v2] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru writes: Change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix() for getting the short name of the remote branch. Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru --- branch.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #6 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use ALLOC_GROW()

Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com writes: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- The subject reads: Subject: [PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #6 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use ALLOC_GROW() I do not think we want to see the leading part of it in our git shortlog output.

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

Lee Hopkins leer...@gmail.com writes: Last week I ran across a potential bug with branch names on case insensitive file systems, the complete scenario can be found here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/msysgit/ugKL-sVMiqI The tldr is because refs are stored as plain text files

Re: [PATCH 1/2] fetch: add a failing test for prunning with overlapping refspecs

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de wrote: Subject: fetch: add a failing test for prunning with overlapping refspecs s/prunning/pruning/ Signed-off-by: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de --- diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh index

Re: [PATCH 2/2] fetch: handle overlaping refspecs on --prune

Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes: From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than one rhs of a fetch refspec. Hmph, do we *need* to, really? Do you mean fetching one ref on the remote side and storing that in multiple

Re: [PATCH 1/2] fetch: add a failing test for prunning with overlapping refspecs

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de wrote: Subject: fetch: add a failing test for prunning with overlapping refspecs s/prunning/pruning/ Signed-off-by: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de --- diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh index

Re: Git in GSoC 2014

On 02/27/2014 08:19 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: Sounds good. I suggest we make your blob a paragraph before the list of bullet points rather than part of the list. Please suggest some TBD* then I'll add it to the text. Would we also fill in X

Re: [PATCH v3 18/25] setup.c: support multi-checkout repo setup

Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com writes: The repo setup procedure is updated to detect $GIT_DIR/commondir and set $GIT_COMMON_DIR properly. The core.worktree is ignored when $GIT_DIR/commondir presents. This is because commondir repos are intended for separate/linked checkouts and

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

On 2014-02-27 20.50, Junio C Hamano wrote: Lee Hopkins leer...@gmail.com writes: Last week I ran across a potential bug with branch names on case insensitive file systems, the complete scenario can be found here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/msysgit/ugKL-sVMiqI The tldr is

Re: Git in GSoC 2014

Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: On 02/27/2014 08:19 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: Sounds good. I suggest we make your blob a paragraph before the list of bullet points rather than part of the list. Please suggest some TBD* then I'll

Re: [PATCH] Rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com writes: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- git-compat-util.h |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h index cbd86c3..4daa6cf 100644

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

Perhaps git-{branch,tag}.txt and possibly gitrepository-layout.txt in Documentation/ may need a new *Note* section to warn against this. A little more documentation never hurt anyone :). Or we can possibly trigger this function at the the of checkout -b or fetch commands ? Only when

Re: [PATCH 2/2] fetch: handle overlaping refspecs on --prune

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes: From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than one rhs of a fetch refspec. Hmph, do we *need* to, really? Do you mean fetching one ref on the

[PATCH] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@gmail.com --- attr.c | 7 +-- builtin/pack-objects.c | 7 +-- bundle.c | 6 +- cache-tree.c | 6 +- commit.c | 8 ++-- diff.c | 12 ++--

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

On 02/27/2014 09:37 PM, Lee Hopkins wrote: Perhaps git-{branch,tag}.txt and possibly gitrepository-layout.txt in Documentation/ may need a new *Note* section to warn against this. A little more documentation never hurt anyone :). Or we can possibly trigger this function at the the of

Re: [PATCH] difftool: support repositories with .git-files

Am 25.02.2014 22:12, schrieb Junio C Hamano: Jens Lehmann jens.lehm...@web.de writes: +test_expect_success PERL 'difftool properly honours gitlink and core.worktree' ' + git submodule add ./. submod/ule + ( + cd submod/ule + git difftool --tool=echo --dir-diff

Students: Please only do one microproject!

Students, Please don't solve more than one microproject. Since the coding part is such a small part of a microproject, doing many is not much more impressive than doing just one. And it takes quite a while to come up with ideas for microprojects! (I can already see that we are running out and

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects Rewrite bulk-checkin.c:finish_bulk_checkin() to use a strbuf for handling packname

On 02/27/2014 03:20 PM, Sun He wrote: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bulk-checkin.c | 10 +- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/bulk-checkin.c b/bulk-checkin.c index 118c625..e3c7fb2 100644 --- a/bulk-checkin.c +++ b/bulk-checkin.c

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #5 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use hashcpy()

On 02/27/2014 03:58 PM, Sun He wrote: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bundle.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/bundle.c b/bundle.c index e99065c..7809fbb 100644 --- a/bundle.c +++ b/bundle.c @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ static void

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 microprojects #6 Change bundle.c:add_to_ref_list() to use ALLOC_GROW()

On 02/27/2014 05:18 PM, Sun He wrote: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- bundle.c |6 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bundle.c b/bundle.c index 7809fbb..1a7b7eb 100644 --- a/bundle.c +++ b/bundle.c @@ -14,11 +14,7 @@ static const

[PATCH] submodule update: document the '--checkout' option

Commit 322bb6e12f (add update 'none' flag to disable update of submodule by default) added the '--checkout' option to git submodule update but forgot to explicitly document it in the synopsis and the man page (It is only mentioned implicitly in the man page). Document this option in synopsis and

Re: [PATCH] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

Dmitry, That's cool; I never imagined there would be so many sites that could be cleaned up in this way. In my opinion, it would be preferable for this patch to be broken into multiple commits, one for each site (or each file, if a file has multiple sites that are logically related). That would

Re: [PATCH] Rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com writes: Signed-off-by: Sun He sunheeh...@gmail.com --- git-compat-util.h |4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-compat-util.h

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 Microproject rewrite finish_bulk_checkin()

On 02/27/2014 08:02 PM, Faiz Kothari wrote: Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com --- bulk-checkin.c | 12 +++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bulk-checkin.c b/bulk-checkin.c index 118c625..feeff9f 100644 --- a/bulk-checkin.c +++

Re: [PATCH v2] branch: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru writes: Change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix() for getting the short name of the remote branch. Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru --- branch.c | 4 ++-- 1

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

Am 27.02.2014 21:32, schrieb Torsten Bögershausen: On 2014-02-27 20.50, Junio C Hamano wrote: Lee Hopkins leer...@gmail.com writes: Last week I ran across a potential bug with branch names on case insensitive file systems, the complete scenario can be found here:

Re: [PATCH] GSoC2014 Microproject rewrite finish_bulk_checkin()

Hi, Thanks for the remarks. I'll stick to this micro project and follow the guidelines. Yes, the strbuf API is perfectly OK. I was not getting to work it properly, so I used malloc() / free() instead. My bad. I'll resubmit the patch. Thanks. On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Michael Haggerty

Re: [PATCH] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

Dmitry S. Dolzhenko dmitrys.dolzhe...@yandex.ru writes: diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c index b35b633..72f6e2a 100644 --- a/dir.c +++ b/dir.c @@ -1329,13 +1329,10 @@ static struct path_simplify *create_simplify(const char **pathspec) for (nr = 0 ; ; nr++) { const char

Re: An idea for git bisect and a GSoC enquiry

On 27 February 2014 06:47, Christian Couder christian.cou...@gmail.com wrote: But I think the most important thing right now is first to gather as much information as you can from the previous discussions on this topic on this mainling list. Perhaps you should also gather information on how

Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] name-hash: allow dir hashing even when !ignore_case

Thomas Rast t...@thomasrast.ch writes: The directory hash (for fast checks if the index already has a directory) was only used in ignore_case mode and so depended on that flag. Make it generally available on request. Signed-off-by: Thomas Rast t...@thomasrast.ch --- I somehow had an

Re: How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org wrote: Have there been previous attempts to look at marking sub-dirs as --skip-worktree, or some other sentinel value for the missing tree? I dealt with this by creating partial index, that only contains entries for interested

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

If I understand the issue correctly, the problem is that packed-refs are always case-sensitive, even if core.ignorecase=true. OTOH, checking / updating _unpacked_ refs on a case-insensitive file system is naturally case-insensitive. So wouldn't it be a better workaround to disallow packed

Re: How to mark a complete sub-directory assume-unchanged/skip-worktree?

From: Duy Nguyen pclo...@gmail.com On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org wrote: Have there been previous attempts to look at marking sub-dirs as --skip-worktree, or some other sentinel value for the missing tree? I dealt with this by creating partial index, that

[PATCH] Problem in bulk-checkin.c:finish_bulk_checkin() Unable to fix

Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com --- Compiles without errors. Fails in test t/t1050-large.sh ,fails 12/15 tests. Dumps memory map and backtrace. Somewhere its not able to free(): invalid pointer. Please somone pointout where I am doing it wrong. Help is really appreciated. Thanks.

BENEFICIARY

Kindly Find Details In Attach File and Reply via Email:rbi.de...@careceo.com RBI 14.docx Description: Binary data

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes: li...@haller-berlin.de (Stefan Haller) writes: Your intention was clearly to drop the stash, it just wasn't dropped because of the conflict. Dropping it automatically once the conflict is resolved would be nice. Your intention when you ran

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes: ... So resolve the conflicts is assuming the intention of the user who issued pop too much (let alone manually---it does not matter how the user resolves conflicts---the only thing we want to say is Git did all it would and no further automated help

[PATCH 1/2] t3200-branch: test setting branch as own upstream

From: modocache modoca...@gmail.com No test asserts that git branch -u refs/heads/my-branch my-branch emits a warning. Add a test that does so. Signed-off-by: Brian Gesiak modoca...@gmail.com --- t/t3200-branch.sh | 8 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t3200-branch.sh

[PATCH 2/2] branch: use skip_prefix

From: modocache modoca...@gmail.com The install_branch_config function reimplemented the skip_prefix function inline. Use skip_prefix function instead for brevity. Signed-off-by: Brian Gesiak modoca...@gmail.com Reported-by: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu --- branch.c | 18

Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

Stephan: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Stephen Leake stephen_le...@stephe-leake.org wrote: You might be adding other files for other reasons. But if you add a file that does resolve a conflict caused by 'git stash pop', it is not guessing. Staging a file doesn't tell git that you resolved

Re: [PATCH] Problem in bulk-checkin.c:finish_bulk_checkin() Unable to fix

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com wrote: Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari faiz.of...@gmail.com --- Compiles without errors. Fails in test t/t1050-large.sh ,fails 12/15 tests. Dumps memory map and backtrace. Somewhere its not able to free(): invalid pointer.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3200-branch: test setting branch as own upstream

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:04:18PM +0900, Brian Gesiak wrote: No test asserts that git branch -u refs/heads/my-branch my-branch emits a warning. Add a test that does so. For an operation like git branch foo origin where setting up the tracking is a side effect, a warning makes sense. But the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] branch: use skip_prefix

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:04:19PM +0900, Brian Gesiak wrote: From: modocache modoca...@gmail.com Both your emailed patches have this, which is due to your author name not matching your sending identity. You probably want to set user.name, or if you already have (which it looks like you might

Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3200-branch: test setting branch as own upstream

For an operation like git branch foo origin where setting up the tracking is a side effect, a warning makes sense. But the sole purpose of the command above is to set the upstream, and we didn't do it; should this warning actually be upgraded to an error? I agree. I originally wrote the test

Re: [PATCH] Rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 09:33:45PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h index cbd86c3..4daa6cf 100644 --- a/git-compat-util.h +++ b/git-compat-util.h @@ -357,8 +357,8 @@ extern int suffixcmp(const char *str, const char *suffix); static

Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3200-branch: test setting branch as own upstream

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 03:17:28PM +0900, Brian Gesiak wrote: For an operation like git branch foo origin where setting up the tracking is a side effect, a warning makes sense. But the sole purpose of the command above is to set the upstream, and we didn't do it; should this warning

[PATCH v2 1/2] t3200-branch: test setting branch as own upstream

No test asserts that git branch -u refs/heads/my-branch my-branch emits a warning. Add a test that does so. Signed-off-by: Brian Gesiak modoca...@gmail.com --- t/t3200-branch.sh | 8 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t3200-branch.sh b/t/t3200-branch.sh index

  1   2   >