Jeff King writes:
> I'm not sure of a solution short of replacing the use of sed here with
> something else. perl would be a simple choice, but filter-branch does
> not otherwise depend on it. We could use a shell "read" loop, but those
> are quite slow (and filter-branch is slow enough as it is!
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:39:47AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> So I can't figure out how to replicate the problem here.
Actually, that's not quite true. I could get hold of an OS X system to
replicate, which I just did.
The problem is that commit 3b754f212 does not have a newline at the end
of its
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:02:17PM +0200, Olivier ROLAND wrote:
> Both versions are builded from source.
> head -1 "$(git --exec-path)/git-filter-branch"
> #!/bin/sh
>
> sh --version
> GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release (x86_64-apple-darwin14)
> Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 07:34:30AM +, Anuradha Dissanayake wrote:
> Let's say I have a file with this content in master:
>
> _
> Line 1
> Line 2
> Line 3
> Line 4
> _
>
> Now say I create and checkout a new branch called Test. In this branch I
> change the file to this:
>
> _
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:04:44PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> This test recently started failing for me. I haven't heard anyone
> else complaining about this, so maybe I should look into why my
> environment may be different to everyone else ... :-D (when I can
> find some time, of course!)
>
>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:10:52AM +, Ed Avis wrote:
> Could 'git show' sprout an option to get multiple things programmatically
> so that they can be separated out again? One way would be to quote or escape
> the contents somehow so that the result can be parsed:
>
> % git show --porcel
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 03:04:56PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Good eyes. While fixing the test is necessary, we should also be
> able to improve the test framework to prevent such mistakes at the
> same time.
>
> ok 38 # skip
> git clone "[myhost:123]:src" ssh-bracket-clone &&
>
Jeff King writes:
> Yes, I agree converting the integer back into a string later does not
> always carry all of the data. OTOH, the caller can often supply the
> context (i.e., this is basically how "errno" works). This gets back to
> the idea we discussed a while ago of having a "struct error" t
Hi,
On 2015-04-29 00:55, Phil Hord wrote:
> When rebase--interactive processes a task, it removes the item from
> the todo list and appends it to another list of executed tasks. If a
> pick (this includes squash and fixup) fails before the index has
> recorded the changes, take the corresponding i
When rebase--interactive processes a task, it removes the item from
the todo list and appends it to another list of executed tasks. If a
pick (this includes squash and fixup) fails before the index has
recorded the changes, take the corresponding item and put it on the todo
list again. Otherwise, t
The last comment in the test took me a minute to decipher. I would
suggest "no repo path called LC" instead of "no repo called LC". Also,
it would have helped me to either have a little comment on the "UC"
version of the test, or to make the previous comment a little more
neutral so that it will ap
Hello Hannes,
let me correct my previous statement:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 08:58:05PM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> When I commit my C source code files with CRLF into the repository
> (because I do not set any line ending options or configurations or any
> 'text' attributes or similar), do
Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:42:13PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Jeff King wrote:
>>> But the NULL does not carry the information about _which_ error, and
>>> Erik is suggesting that the caller may need to change behavior based on
>>> that information. IOW, his current patch
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:42:13PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jeff King wrote:
>
> > But the NULL does not carry the information about _which_ error, and
> > Erik is suggesting that the caller may need to change behavior based on
> > that information. IOW, his current patch (return NULL and
Jeff King wrote:
> But the NULL does not carry the information about _which_ error, and
> Erik is suggesting that the caller may need to change behavior based on
> that information. IOW, his current patch (return NULL and set the
> specific integer code in a variable) allows this, but switching th
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:34:00PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jeff King wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:07:43PM +0200, erik elfström wrote:
>
> >> Also if it turns out that we actually need to treat the "file too
> >> large" error differently in clean (as discussed in thread on the fil
Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:07:43PM +0200, erik elfström wrote:
>> Also if it turns out that we actually need to treat the "file too
>> large" error differently in clean (as discussed in thread on the file
>> size check) then we can no longer communicate that back using the
>> st
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> This iteration looks reasonable overall to me.
>
> Should this is_git_repository() helper be available to other files? I
> think there are other calls to resolve_gitlink_ref() that would want the
> same treatment (e.g., I think "git status" may
Am 28.04.2015 um 21:52 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Johannes Sixt writes:
I set none of these. But I do commit CRLF and expect to get CRLF
back. Am I commiting binary files? Am I doing something that "Git does
not support"? Am I "on [my] own"?
I think these specific sentences are merely uninforme
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:07:43PM +0200, erik elfström wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> >
> > There was a discussion not too long ago on strategies for returning
> > errors, and one of the suggestions was to return an "error strbuf"
> > rather than a code[1]. That's l
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> There was a discussion not too long ago on strategies for returning
> errors, and one of the suggestions was to return an "error strbuf"
> rather than a code[1]. That's less flexible, as the caller can't react
> differently based on the type of
Johannes Sixt writes:
> I set none of these. But I do commit CRLF and expect to get CRLF
> back. Am I commiting binary files? Am I doing something that "Git does
> not support"? Am I "on [my] own"?
I think these specific sentences are merely uninformed opinions; if
I ignore and re-read what peop
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> Do we actually need a large repo here? The real cost is coming from the
> directories we create. We could actually start with a totally empty
> repository if we wanted (though I don't think the t/perf system handles
> that right now). But if th
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> My understanding is that PATH_MAX is set absurdly low on Windows
> systems (and doesn't actually represent the real limit of a path!).
> Since the value is picked arbitrarily anyway, could use something more
> independent (like 100K or somethin
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:19:00PM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote:
> >> Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits
> >> contain a change to the same (and onl
Am 27.04.2015 um 21:45 schrieb Torsten Bögershausen:
On 04/27/2015 08:58 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
Am 27.04.2015 um 08:11 schrieb Stepan Kasal:
Git does not support CRLF as the internal line separator.
If you commit file in binary mode with CRLF, you are on your own.
When I commit my C source
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote:
>> Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits
>> contain a change to the same (and only) submodule in the repository.
>> When I rebase this branch onto the t
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote:
> Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits
> contain a change to the same (and only) submodule in the repository.
> When I rebase this branch onto the tip of its parent branch, I get a
> conflict in each of the
Hi,
On 2015-04-28 17:33, Doug Kelly wrote:
> If you're able to do everything through the Unicode Win32 APIs, you can reach
> 65535 characters, assuming the filesystem supports it (NTFS does, FAT32 would
> not, for example). I recall there being one function (possibly thinking of
> mktemp) tha
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:23 AM Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
>
> Hi Peff,
>
> On 2015-04-28 08:02, Jeff King wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that PATH_MAX is set absurdly low on Windows
> > systems (and doesn't actually represent the real limit of a path!).
>
> Well, yes and no. Yes, it is absurdly
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Robert Dailey wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm using Git for Windows 2.3.6. There is a bit of confusion I have
> with regards to how submodule conflicts are resolved/handled during a
> rebase.
>
> Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits
> contai
Hello Tummala,
On 04/28/2015 07:15 PM, Tummala Dhanvi wrote:
Hi ,
I would like to contribute to git.
Can you guys point me to some useful resources to get me started to
contribute to git.
I suggest you go through the Documentation, especially
"Documentation/CodingGuidelines" and "Documentat
Hey guys,
I'm using Git for Windows 2.3.6. There is a bit of confusion I have
with regards to how submodule conflicts are resolved/handled during a
rebase.
Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits
contain a change to the same (and only) submodule in the repository.
When I
Hi ,
I would like to contribute to git.
Can you guys point me to some useful resources to get me started to
contribute to git.
Also does git have something like junior jobs so that It can be done
by new to contribution.
Also searching about the git in google points to some other
organisation wh
Hello to Everyone,
On 04/28/2015 01:20 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
Hi,
The results just got offical: the Git organization has 2 students
accepted for the summer of code 2015.
Karthik Nayak will work on "Unifying git branch -l, git tag -l, and git
for-each-ref" mentored by Christian Couder and your
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones
---
Hi Junio,
This test recently started failing for me. I haven't heard anyone
else complaining about this, so maybe I should look into why my
environment may be different to everyone else ... :-D (when I can
find some time, of course!)
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
t/t7502-
On 04/28/2015 12:08 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:57 AM, karthik nayak wrote:
> On 04/25/2015 10:34 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> karthik nayak writes:
>>> Yes this gives the best description, but its large, while we could use
>>> something like --no-strict instead.
>>
>> W
2015-04-28 7:55 GMT+02:00 Jeff King :
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 11:25:52AM +0200, Olivier ROLAND wrote:
>
>> OSX 10.10.3 git 2.3.6 HFS+ case-sensitive
>>
>> How to reproduce :
>> Step 1 : git clone https://github.com/begeric/FastParsers.git
>> Step 2 : cd FastParsers/
>> Step 3 : git filter-branch
I would like to see the content of a file in multiple revisions.
I can get them with 'git show' as follows:
% git show REV1:FILE
% git show REV2:FILE
and so on. But that launches a new process for each revision. Now, there is
the option to pass multiple arguments to 'git show':
% g
On Tue, 2015-04-28 at 00:57 -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:49:51PM -0300, Thiago Farina wrote:
>
> > Is it right that git uses libcurl to download while libgit2 does without it?
>
> I'm not sure if you mean "right" as in "this statement is true" or as in
> "is this a good th
On 28/04/15 10:08, Luke Diamand wrote:
Lex found out recently that when git-p4 is asked to clone a repo
and the case of the repo is incorrect (but otherwise correct) that
git-p4, instead of reporting an error, appears to work fine, but
actually produces an empty repo. This can be quite confusing.
When p4d runs on a case-folding OS, git-p4 can end up getting
very confused. This adds failing tests to demonstrate the problem.
Signed-off-by: Luke Diamand
---
t/lib-git-p4.sh| 2 +-
t/t9819-git-p4-case-folding.sh | 54 ++
2 files changed
Lex found out recently that when git-p4 is asked to clone a repo
and the case of the repo is incorrect (but otherwise correct) that
git-p4, instead of reporting an error, appears to work fine, but
actually produces an empty repo. This can be quite confusing.
This patch adds a couple of failing tes
Hi all,
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Matthieu Moy
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The results just got offical: the Git organization has 2 students
> accepted for the summer of code 2015.
>
> Karthik Nayak will work on "Unifying git branch -l, git tag -l, and git
> for-each-ref" mentored by Christian Couder
I posted this question to StackOverflow a while ago but no one answered
it so I thought I'd try here.
Let's say I have a file with this content in master:
_
Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Line 4
_
Now say I create and checkout a new branch called Test. In this branch I
change the file to this:
On 28/04/15 09:28, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Torsten Bögershausen writes:
What do you think about the following test cases for a V2 patch ?
test_expect_success 'create blamerepo' '
test_create_repo blamerepo &&
(
cd blamerepo &&
printf "testcase\r\n" >crlffile &&
Torsten Bögershausen writes:
> What do you think about the following test cases for a V2 patch ?
>
> test_expect_success 'create blamerepo' '
> test_create_repo blamerepo &&
> (
> cd blamerepo &&
> printf "testcase\r\n" >crlffile &&
> git -c core.autocrlf=false add
Hi Peff,
On 2015-04-28 08:02, Jeff King wrote:
> My understanding is that PATH_MAX is set absurdly low on Windows
> systems (and doesn't actually represent the real limit of a path!).
Well, yes and no. Yes, it is absurdly low on Windows, and yes, it is not the
real limit of a path *if you know
Using Jeff's suggestion of converting the t9814 test to use
test_lazy_prereq makes the test a lot clearer, and as a bonus,
also fixes the --chain-lint error.
Version 3 of the patch corrects a small typo in the commit message
of version 2.
Luke Diamand (1):
git-p4: t9814: prevent --chain-lint fa
Use test_lazy_prereq to setup prerequisites for the p4 move
test. This both makes the test simpler and clearer, and also
means it no longer fails the new --chain-lint tests.
Suggested-by: Jeff King
Signed-off-by: Luke Diamand
---
t/t9814-git-p4-rename.sh | 11 +++
1 file changed, 3 inse
Michael Haggerty writes:
> On 04/27/2015 09:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
>> Hmm, that may be technically correct but it is grossly misleading to
>> update the existing "was obtained on 2014-04-07" to "was obtained on
>> 2015-04-27", especially if nothing was actually obtained, isn't it?
> .
Eric Sunshine writes:
> Right. Rather than having a separate global 'show_email' variable and
> consulting that variable in parallel with OUTPUT_SHOW_EMAIL throughout
> the code, instead set the OUTPUT_SHOW_EMAIL bit in git_blame_config().
> To do this, take advantage of the "callback data" argum
52 matches
Mail list logo
