Eric Rannaud writes:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> I think that your patch the last round that feeds fd#8 in the
>> foreground (i.e. fully trusting that the caller is sensibly giving
>> input that produces no output) is
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I think that your patch the last round that feeds fd#8 in the
> foreground (i.e. fully trusting that the caller is sensibly giving
> input that produces no output) is already a good place to stop.
>
> Your patch this
"Eric Rannaud" writes:
> Junio, this last version addresses your last remark regarding the
> potential for the cat $input_file sequence to block when the FIFOs are
> unbuffered.
>
> The concern is mainly theoretical (*if* the shell function is used
> correctly):
The checkpoint command cycles packfiles if object_count != 0, a sensible
test or there would be no pack files to write. Since 820b931012, the
command also dumps branches, tags and marks, but still conditionally.
However, it is possible for a command stream to modify refs or create
marks without
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 5:59 AM, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:07:41PM -0700, Eric Rannaud wrote:
>>
>> Also adding the necessary PIPE prereq, as pointed out by Ramsay Jones.
>
> Cygwin doesn't have the PIPE prereq; I've just confirmed that the
> previous
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Eric Rannaud writes:
>
>> Doesn't fast-import get a copy of 8 (open for both reading and
>> writing), as a child process, and exec 8>&- only closes the copy of
>> the file descriptor in the parent
Eric Rannaud writes:
> Doesn't fast-import get a copy of 8 (open for both reading and
> writing), as a child process, and exec 8>&- only closes the copy of
> the file descriptor in the parent shell, so the named pipe remains
> open for writing somewhere (in the fast-import
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 8:48 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> + cat $input_file >&8
>
> It probably is a good idea to quote "$input_file" in case other
> people later use a full path to the file or something; for now this
> is OK.
Right.
> fd#8 at this point does not have a
"Eric Rannaud" writes:
> diff --git a/t/t9300-fast-import.sh b/t/t9300-fast-import.sh
> index 67b8c50a5ab4..9aa3470d895b 100755
> --- a/t/t9300-fast-import.sh
> +++ b/t/t9300-fast-import.sh
> @@ -3120,4 +3120,133 @@ test_expect_success 'U: validate root delete result' '
>
On 27/09/17 20:46, Eric Rannaud wrote:
> The checkpoint command cycles packfiles if object_count != 0, a sensible
> test or there would be no pack files to write. Since 820b931012, the
> command also dumps branches, tags and marks, but still conditionally.
> However, it is possible for a command
The checkpoint command cycles packfiles if object_count != 0, a sensible
test or there would be no pack files to write. Since 820b931012, the
command also dumps branches, tags and marks, but still conditionally.
However, it is possible for a command stream to modify refs or create
marks without
"Eric Rannaud" writes:
> The checkpoint command cycles packfiles if object_count != 0, a sensible
> test or there would be no pack files to write. Since 820b931012, the
> command also dumps branches, tags and marks, but still conditionally.
> However, it is possible for a
The checkpoint command cycles packfiles if object_count != 0, a sensible
test or there would be no pack files to write. Since 820b931012, the
command also dumps branches, tags and marks, but still conditionally.
However, it is possible for a command stream to modify refs or create
marks without
13 matches
Mail list logo