On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 09:41:25AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Stefan Beller writes:
> >
> >> (I note this as you regard your patches as a lunch time hack
> >> in the cooking email; I am serious
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> (I note this as you regard your patches as a lunch time hack
>> in the cooking email; I am serious about these patches though.)
>
> We do not want to touch borrowed code
Stefan Beller writes:
> (I note this as you regard your patches as a lunch time hack
> in the cooking email; I am serious about these patches though.)
We do not want to touch borrowed code unnecessarily. Are these
lines and bits hampering further progress we are actively
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> Let's do this bit-shuffling as a preliminary clean-up.
>
> These 2 patches can go on top of that as well.
Actually these textually do not conflict with your patch,
and they can be picked independently, e.g. they could
> Let's do this bit-shuffling as a preliminary clean-up.
These 2 patches can go on top of that as well.
Thanks,
Stefan
Stefan Beller (2):
xdiff/xdiff.h: remove unused flags
xdiff/xdiffi.c: remove unneeded function declarations
xdiff/xdiff.h | 8
xdiff/xdiffi.c | 17
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] xdiff: reassign xpparm_t.flags bits
>
> We have packed the bits too tightly in such a way that it is not
> easy to add a new type of whitespace ignoring option, a new type
> of LCS algorithm, or a new
Hi Lars,
On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Lars Schneider wrote:
> > On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> >
> > Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
> >> I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not
> >> have any, say, Unix shell script in
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> (1<<5) is taken twice now.
>
> Good eyes. I think we use bits #1-#8 now (bit #0 is vacant, so are
> #9-#31).
Let's do this bit-shuffling as a preliminary clean-up.
-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] xdiff:
Ross Kabus writes:
> Is "* -text" in any way different than "-text" (without the * asterisk)? All
> of my .gitattributes files have "-text" (no * asterisk) and I haven't noticed
> any difference but could I be missing something subtle?
>
> ~Ross
A line in the .gitattibute
Is "* -text" in any way different than "-text" (without the * asterisk)? All
of my .gitattributes files have "-text" (no * asterisk) and I haven't noticed
any difference but could I be missing something subtle?
~Ross
Thank you for the clarification, it's much appreciated.
-- Hannes
Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 26.10.2017 um 13:01 schrieb Lars Schneider:
>> * -text
>> *.sh text eol=lf
>
> Why would that be necessary? I cannot have CRLF in shell scripts etc., not
> even on Windows. (And in addition I do not mind CR in C++ source code.) All
> I want is: Git, please, by all
Am 26.10.2017 um 13:01 schrieb Lars Schneider:
On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote:
Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not
have any, say, Unix shell script in it. Try this, and weep:
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 01:01:25PM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote:
>
> > On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> >
> > Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
> >> I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not
> >> have any, say, Unix
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:13:57AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Lars Schneider wrote:
> >> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> >> In any event, you also probably want to declare what you're doing
> >> using .gitattributes. By checking in
> On 25 Oct 2017, at 19:13, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> Lars Schneider wrote:
>>> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>>> In any event, you also probably want to declare what you're doing
>>> using .gitattributes. By
> On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>
> Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
>> I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not
>> have any, say, Unix shell script in it. Try this, and weep:
>> $ printf 'echo
Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not
have any, say, Unix shell script in it. Try this, and weep:
$ printf 'echo \\\r\n\t123\r\n' >a1
$ sh a1
a1: 2: a1: 123: not found
I was bitten
Stefan Beller writes:
>> diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c
>> index 6fd288420b..eeca0fd3b8 100644
>> --- a/diff.c
>> +++ b/diff.c
>> @@ -4202,7 +4202,8 @@ void diff_setup_done(struct diff_options *options)
>>
>> if (DIFF_XDL_TST(options, IGNORE_WHITESPACE) ||
>>
Hi again,
Lars Schneider wrote:
>> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> In any event, you also probably want to declare what you're doing
>> using .gitattributes. By checking in the files as CRLF, you are
>> declaring that you do *not* want Git to treat them
> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Lars Schneider wrote:
>
>> I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits)
>> and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index
>> of the repo have CRLF
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Here is a lunch-time hack to add that option. As you can see from
> the lack of docs, tests and a proper log message, I haven't played
> with it long enough to know how buggy it is, though. I am not all
> that
Hi Hannes,
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 24.10.2017 um 19:48 schrieb Lars Schneider:
> > I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k
> > commits)
> > and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index
> > of the repo have CRLF
Hi,
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> The penalty may be low, but Dscho once reported that it [line endings
> conversion] is measurable & painful on a "big repo".
Yes, I do not remember the details, but it must have been around 5-15%
speed improvement to prevent the autoCRLF
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
>> I'd be interested to hear what happens when diff-ing across a line
>> ending fixup commit. Is this an area where Git needs some
>> improvement? "git merge" knows an -Xrenormalize option to deal with a
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> I'd be interested to hear what happens when diff-ing across a line
> ending fixup commit. Is this an area where Git needs some
> improvement? "git merge" knows an -Xrenormalize option to deal with a
> related problem --- it's possible that "git
Am 24.10.2017 um 19:48 schrieb Lars Schneider:
I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits)
and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index
of the repo have CRLF line endings. In general this seems not to be a problem
as the project
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:14:15AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lars Schneider wrote:
>
> > I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k
> > commits)
> > and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index
> > of the repo have CRLF
Hi,
Lars Schneider wrote:
> I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits)
> and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index
> of the repo have CRLF line endings. In general this seems not to be a problem
> as the project is developed
Hi,
I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits)
and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index
of the repo have CRLF line endings. In general this seems not to be a problem
as the project is developed exclusively on Windows.
30 matches
Mail list logo