Re: [PATCH v4] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 01:13:48PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:12:18PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Step back and think why git bisect --first-parent is sometimes desired in the first place. It is because in the regular

[PATCH v5] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

--bisect --first parent either, because refs/heads/bad is not limited to the first parent chain. Helped-by: Junio C. Hamano gits...@pobox.com Helped-by: Eric Sunshine sunsh...@sunshineco.com Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info --- Updates since v4: * Not only refusing rev-list --bisect

Re: [PATCH v5] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 03:43:57PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently, and even leads to segfaults

Re: [PATCH v3] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

On Sun, Mar 08, 2015 at 05:58:24PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info wrote: rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently

[PATCH v4] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

Sunshine sunsh...@sunshineco.com Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info --- Changes since v3: * Added an ifdef::git-rev-list[] guard around the warning in the --first-parent section so that it only shows up in `man git-rev-list` and not in `man git log` * Added the warning also to the --bisect

Re: [PATCH v4] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:12:18PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: git log --bisect seems to do something different then git rev-list --bisect From git-log(1): Pretend as if the bad bisection ref refs/bisect/bad was listed

[PATCH] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently, and even leads to segfaults, refuse to use both options together. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info --- This is my first code

Re: [PATCH] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 10:31:16PM +0100, Kevin Daudt wrote: diff --git a/builtin/rev-list.c b/builtin/rev-list.c index ff84a82..c271e15 100644 --- a/builtin/rev-list.c +++ b/builtin/rev-list.c @@ -291,6 +291,9 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix

Re: [PATCH v4] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 03:09:54PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently, and even leads to segfaults

Re: git-remote add: --no-tags/--tags which one is the default option

On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:48:24AM +0100, Francis Moreau wrote: Hi, git remote add has --no-tags/--tags option, but I can't find in the man page which one is the default. Could anybody tell me the default option ? Neither is default. This option has three states, set, unset and

Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: explain behaviour of remote add without tag option

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 04:46:47PM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote: So, how does this relate to: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/264592 I don't mind you taking this over at all, it's just that we should keep things together where the discussion begun. Michael

[PATCH 1/2] docs: explain behaviour with no tagopt set

Currently, only the behaviour when this option is set is explained, but it's unclear what happens when this option hasn't been set. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info --- Documentation/config.txt | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation

[PATCH 2/2] docs: explain behaviour of remote add without tag option

Only behaviour with these options are currently explained. Add explanation what the default behaviour is. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info --- Documentation/git-remote.txt | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote.txt b/Documentation/git-remote.txt

Re: Identifying user who ran “git reset” command

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:16:18PM -0700, Technext wrote: Thanks Junio for the prompt reply! :) Yes, that's exactly how i would like things to be. I'll definitely try to push this thing and see if this flow can be implemented. However, can you please guide me whether there's any way i could

Re: question about resume support.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 08:01:27PM +0100, drathi...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi... Im wonder there is planned or maybe there is support of resuming interrupted git operation e.g. cloning repositories? Not sure about how hard that could be to

[PATCH v3] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently, and even leads to segfaults, refuse to use both options together. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Suggested-by: Junio C

[PATCH v3] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently, and even leads to segfaults, refuse to use both options together. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Suggested-by: Junio C

[PATCH v2] rev-list: refuse --first-parent combined with --bisect

rev-list --bisect is used by git bisect, but never together with --first-parent. Because rev-list --bisect together with --first-parent is not handled currently, and even leads to segfaults, refuse to use both options together. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Suggested-by: Junio C

Re: About git log

On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 10:21:37PM +0800, niu2x wrote: I'm a beginner. Please tell me the log of git commit is exist forever or 90 days As long as a commit is (indirectly) referenced by a branch or tag, it will be kept forever. Only if you rewrite history causing commits to be unreferenced (for

Re: git-archive ignores submodules

On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 09:03:10PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote: Am 16.04.2015 um 20:09 schrieb Pedro Rodrigues: If people are interested I could try to polish it and resubmit it. It would be great if Pedro could test that it does what he expects. I'm certainly interested. -- To unsubscribe

Re: Suggestion: make git checkout safer

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 09:55:05AM +, Ed Avis wrote: Jeff King peff at peff.net writes: If my personal experience is anything to go by, newcomers may fall into the habit of running 'git checkout .' to restore missing files. In the old days I would often delete a file and then run 'cvs

[PATCH v2 1/2] t5520-pull: Simplify --rebase with dirty tree test

Simplify the test case for testing git aborts the pull --rebase when the work tree is dirty. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Helped-by: Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com --- This is a preparation for the next pathch. Changes since v1: - Moved the tests just belof the first --rebase test

[PATCH v2 2/2] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

From: Kevin Daudt compufr...@gmail.com rebase learned to stash changes when it encounters a dirty work tree, but git pull --rebase does not. Only verify if the working tree is dirty when rebase.autostash is not enabled. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Helped-by: Paul Tan pyoka

Re: [PATCH v2 17/19] pull --rebase: exit early when the working directory is dirty

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:49:01PM +0800, Paul Tan wrote: Re-implement the behavior introduced by f9189cf (pull --rebase: exit early when the working directory is dirty, 2008-05-21). When the option rebase.autoStash is set, it should not be necessary to die in this case. See also this[1] patch

[PATCH] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

rebase learned to stash changes when it encounters a dirty work tree, but git pull --rebase does not. Only verify if the working tree is dirty when rebase.autostash is not enabled. --- git-pull.sh | 5 - t/t5520-pull.sh | 17 + 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1

Re: [PATCH v2 17/19] pull --rebase: exit early when the working directory is dirty

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 12:27:16PM +0200, Kevin Daudt wrote: On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:49:01PM +0800, Paul Tan wrote: Re-implement the behavior introduced by f9189cf (pull --rebase: exit early when the working directory is dirty, 2008-05-21). When the option rebase.autoStash is set

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:34:08PM +0800, Paul Tan wrote: On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info wrote: From: Kevin Daudt compufr...@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Ehh? The sign-off does not match the author of the patch. I changed

[PATCH v3] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

rebase learned to stash changes when it encounters a dirty work tree, but git pull --rebase does not. Only verify if the working tree is dirty when rebase.autostash is not enabled. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Helped-by: Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com --- Changes to v2: - Dropped

kd/

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:36:34AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: - require_clean_work_tree pull with rebase Please commit or stash them. + if [ $(git config --bool --get rebase.autostash || echo false) = false ] Style (use

[PATCH v4] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

rebase learned to stash changes when it encounters a dirty work tree, but git pull --rebase does not. Only verify if the working tree is dirty when rebase.autostash is not enabled. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info Helped-by: Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com --- git-pull.sh | 3 ++- t

Re: wishlist: make it possible to amend commit messages after push to remote

On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 08:23:02PM -0400, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: Not for the first time, and probably not for the last, I pushed a commit upstream without adding a link for the bug report as I was meaning to. Or it could have been... - Simple typos. - Broken URLs. - The

Re: [PATCH v5] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 11:59:56AM +0800, Paul Tan wrote: On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 01:39:47PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: rebase learned to stash changes when it encounters a dirty work tree, but git pull --rebase does not. Only verify

Re: [PATCH v5] pull: allow dirty tree when rebase.autostash enabled

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:42:17PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kevin Daudt m...@ikke.info writes: On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 11:59:56AM +0800, Paul Tan wrote: Any news about this? Is it still waiting for something? Paul's patch was buried in the noise and I didn't notice it. I'd

Re: git-cherry doesn't detect a "copied" commit

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:32:12PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: > Hi, > > I'm seeing something odd with git-cherry: it doesn't seem to detect > that a commit has been cherry-picked from master branch. > > This happens with the systemd git repository (from github) so it > should be fairly simple

Re: [PATCH] Fix worktree usage message

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 04:32:24PM +0530, Sidhant Sharma wrote: > Mark as optional in worktree command line usage. Thank you for the patch. Can you also explain why you mark it as optional in the commit message? That way it's clear why this patch is needed. > > Hi, just starting out with

Re: interactive rebase results across shared histories

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:57:06PM +0100, Moritz Neeb wrote: > On 02/23/2016 06:39 PM, Seb wrote: > > On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 03:12:49 +0100, > > Moritz Neeb wrote: > > > >> Hi Seb, > >> On 02/20/2016 11:58 PM, Seb wrote: > >>> Hello, > > > >>> I've recently learnt how to

Re: git diff HEAD^(255) fails

On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 10:56:46PM +0100, Ole Tange wrote: > git diff first looks for a file, then looks if it is a reference to a > revision. If the file fails due to being too long, the diff fails: > > $ git init > $ git diff >

Re: git mv messed up file mapping if folders contain identical files

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 04:38:11PM -0700, Bill Okara wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed the following 'git mv' issue with: > git version 2.6.4 > > > If there are identical files in different subfolders, 'git mv' the > root folder (and/or each file individually) will mess up the file path > mapping.

Re: Question about pull-requests

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 05:24:15PM +0530, Nagaraj Mandya wrote: > Hello, > In our GIT repository, all users are restricted from merging to > master without a pull request. This works well and all developers are > raising pull requests and merging. However, if there is a merge > conflict during

Re: Restore Question

riginal Message- > From: Kevin Daudt [mailto:m...@ikke.info] > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 11:44 AM > To: Gerald McKinley <gmckin...@ventureforth.com> > Cc: git@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: Restore Question > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 02:18:16PM +, Gerald

Re: Restore Question

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 02:18:16PM +, Gerald wrote: > I have git running on a VMware virtual machine. I backup the virtual > machine every day. How do I restore git from a restore of the virtual > machine? > Can you explain what you mean exactly with restoring git? It's unclear what you

[no subject]

subscribe git -- 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

[PATCH] cherry-pick: add --no-verify option

happening Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> --- builtin/revert.c| 2 ++ sequencer.c | 21 - sequencer.h | 1 + t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh | 12 4 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 5 del

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: reword rebase summary

On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 02:49:58PM -0800, Stefan Beller wrote: > The wording is introduced in c3f0baaca (Documentation: sync git.txt > command list and manual page title, 2007-01-18), but rebase has evolved > since then, capture the modern usage by being more generic about the > rebase command in

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Introduction

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:03:33AM +0530, Sidhant Sharma wrote: > > > > Other than this, I also tried to expand the list of potentially destructive > commands and updated the list as follows (additions in brackets): > > * git rebase [ git pull --rebase ] > * git reset --hard > * git clean -f >

Re: Change in .gitignore handling: intended or bug?

rything except directory foo/bar > /* > !/foo > /foo/* > !/foo/bar > > Note the /foo/*, explicitly ignoring the entries below /foo. > > This wasn't always the case, though, so I'd love to hear if it was > intentional > (or if I've lost my mind, which i

Re: Change in .gitignore handling: intended or bug?

On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 09:11:56PM -0500, Charles Strahan wrote: > Hello, > > I've found a change in the way .gitignore works, and I'm not sure if > it's a bug > or intended. > > Previously, one could use the following .gitignore: > > * > !/foo > !/foo/bar.txt > !/baz >

Re: Bypassing hooks while cherry-picking

On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 12:01:53PM +0100, greg0ire wrote: > Hello, > > using git 2.1.4 here, and it seems there is no option to bypass pre-commit > hooks while cherry-picking, while git commit provides a --no-verify option. > I ended up doing this to disable hooks while cherry picking : > >

Re: How to include just some subdirectory excluding all envelop tree

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:01:52PM +0300, Olga Pshenichnikova wrote: > I have some tree structure: > > /a > /a/a > /a/b > .. > /a/z > /b > .. (thousands of folders) > /z > > How can I control just /a/a folder? > What exclude file should be? > > The way we use now is: > > /a/* > /b/ > ..

[PATCH v2] cherry-pick: add --no-verify option

git commit has a --no-verify option to prevent the pre-commit hook from running. When continuing a conflicted cherry-pick, git commit gets executed which also causes the pre-commit hook to be run. Add --no-verify and pass that through to the git commit command. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt &l

Re: Bug in 'git describe' if I have two tags on the same commit.

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 01:15:22PM +0100, Istvan Pato wrote: > I didn't get back the latest tag by 'git describe --tags --always' if > I have two tags on the same commit. > > // repository ppa:git-core/ppa > > (master)⚡ % cat /etc/lsb-release > DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu > DISTRIB_RELEASE=16.04 >

Re: [PATCH 01/34] sequencer: support a new action: 'interactive rebase'

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:54:02AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > @@ -43,16 +51,20 @@ static GIT_PATH_FUNC(rebase_path_gpg_sign_opt, > "rebase-merge/gpg_sign_opt") > /* We will introduce the 'interactive rebase' mode later */ > static inline int is_rebase_i(const struct replay_opts *opts)

Re: Why patch is not showed at log?

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 11:13:09AM +0300, KES wrote: > > Why I do not see changes at log when 'new line' was added at the end of file? I'm not sure what you exactly mean, but do you want to see the actual change the patch introduces in the log output? In that case, you can use git log --patch to

Re: Diff impromements: keep block whole

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:36:26PM +0300, KES wrote: > Does it be more meaning full which change was done when diff will be > displayed as: > @@ -1278,6 +1311,16 @@ sub process { > if( ref $result eq 'HASH' ) { > $code = $result->{ code }; >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git User's Survey 2016

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 03:52:28PM +0200, Jakub Narębski wrote: > Hello Kevin, > > On 13 September 2016 at 15:32, Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 09:51:09PM +0200, Jakub Narębski wrote: > > >> > >> P.P.S. Different a

Re: [RFC 0/1] mailinfo: de-quote quoted-pair in header fields

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:54:47PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > It has been a while since I looked at rfc2822, but aren't the quoting > > and syntax rules different for addresses versus other headers? We would > > not want to dequote a Subject header, I

[RFC 0/1] de-quote quoted-strings in mailinfo

According to the RFC, comments can also appear in square brackets in the e-mail domain, but that has not been implemented. In fact, just like other functions, it just looks at the whole header line. Please let me know what you think. Kevin Daudt (1): mailinfo: de-quote quoted-pair in header fields

[RFC 0/1] mailinfo: de-quote quoted-pair in header fields

. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> --- mailinfo.c | 46 ++ t/t5100-mailinfo.sh| 5 + t/t5100/quoted-pair.expect | 5 + t/t5100/quoted-pair.in | 9 + t/t5100/quoted-pair.info | 5 + 5

[RFC 0/1] de-quote quoted-strings in mailinfo

According to the RFC, comments can also appear in square brackets in the e-mail domain, but that has not been implemented. In fact, just like other functions, it just looks at the whole header line. Please let me know what you think. Kevin Daudt (1): mailinfo: de-quote quoted-pair in header fields

Re: [RFC 0/1] mailinfo: de-quote quoted-pair in header fields

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 05:04:45PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> writes: > > > It often is easier to read if smaller of the two are in the if part > and the larger in else part. Also your switch/case is indented one > level too deep. I.e. &

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git User's Survey 2016

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 09:51:09PM +0200, Jakub Narębski wrote: > Hello all, > > > P.P.S. Different announcements use different URLs (different channels) > to better track where one got information about this survey. > > Thanks in advance for taking time to answer the survey, Can we get a

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:15:41AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:17:23PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 08:54:40PM +0200, Kevin Daudt wrote: > > > > >

[PATCH v3 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

so that they don't show up in the author field. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> --- Changes since v2: - handle comments inside comments recursively - renamed the main function to unquote_quoted_pairs because it als

[PATCH v3 1/2] t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable

Many tests need to store data in a file, and repeat the same pattern to refer to that path: "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/t5100/ Create a variable that contains this path, and use that instead. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobo

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:26:13PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > Don't these also need to be downcased if you prefer $data over > > $DATA, though? > > For now, I'll queue a SQUASH??? that reverts s/DATA/data/ you did to > 1/2 between your 1/2 and

Re: Setting pager.add=true breaks add --patch

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 10:55:11AM +0700, Tom Hale wrote: > On 2016-10-03 00:00, Anatoly Borodin wrote: > > I've reported this one bug recently: > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/nrmbrl$hsk$1...@blaine.gmane.org/ > > > > The developers know about it, but it will require some deeper

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2016, #02; Thu, 6)

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 09:40:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> writes: > > > Just wondering why the topic "kd/mailinfo-quoted-string (2016-09-28) 2 > > commits" is not listed anymore. Previous what's cooking said it was > >

Re: Bug? git worktree fails with master on bare repo

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 07:30:36PM -0500, Michael Tutty wrote: > Hey all, > I'm working on some server-side software to do a merge. By using git > worktree it's possible to check out a given branch for a bare repo and > merge another branch into it. It's very fast, even with large > repositories.

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2016, #02; Thu, 6)

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 03:24:17PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with > '-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with > '+' are in 'next'. The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of > the integration

Re: [RFC 0/1] mailinfo: de-quote quoted-pair in header fields

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:38:20PM -0700, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:30:06PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Another small thing I am not sure about is if the \ quoting can hide > > an embedded newline in the author name. Would we end up turning > > > > From: "Jeff \ >

Re: [PATCH] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

Thanks for the review On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 03:22:06PM -0700, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 11:02:04PM +0200, Kevin Daudt wrote: > > > mailinfo.c | 54 > > ++ > > t/t5100-mailinfo.sh

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2016, #05; Mon, 19)

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 04:30:34PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > * kd/mailinfo-quoted-string (2016-09-19) 2 commits > - mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields > - t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable Is this good enough, or do you want me to look into the

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2016, #05; Mon, 19)

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:36:57AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> writes: > > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 04:30:34PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > >> * kd/mailinfo-quoted-string (2016-09-19) 2 commits > >> - ma

[PATCH] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

characters from the author so that they don't show up in the commits author field. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> --- The only thing I could not easily fix is the prevent git am from removing any quotes around the author. This is done in fmt_ident, which calls `strbuf_addstr_withou

[PATCH v2 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

that they don't show up in the author field. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> --- mailinfo.c | 46 t/t5100-mailinfo.sh | 14 ++ t/t5100/comment.expect | 5 + t/t5100/comment.in

[PATCH v2 0/2] Handle escape characters in From field.

Changes since v2: - detach from input parameter to reuse it as an output buffer - don't return error when encountering another open bracket in a comment - test escaping in comments Kevin Daudt (2): t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair

[PATCH v2 1/2] t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable

Many tests need to store data in a file, and repeat the same pattern to refer to that path: "$TEST_DATA"/t5100/ Create a variable that contains this path, and use that instead. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> --- t/t5100-

Re: .gitignore does not ignore Makefile

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 09:19:22AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote: > I have the following .gitignore file in patch arm/arm64/boot/dts: > > *.dtb > qcom > qcom.orig > > When I do a git status, I see this: > > modified: .gitignore > modified: qcom/Makefile > > All of the other files in

Re: Limitiations of git rebase --preserve-merges --interactive

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 07:33:11PM +, Anatoly Borodin wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > this section was added to the manual in the commit > cddb42d2c58a9de9b2b5ef68817778e7afaace3e by "Jonathan Nieder" > 6 years ago. Maybe he remembers better? > Just to make it clear, this

Re: Request for large repo clone on slow intermittent connections

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:54:57PM +0100, Aaron Gray wrote: > I am having problems cloning a 2.1GB repo from googlesource > > C:\Users\Aaron Gray\GitHub>git clone > https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/chromium > Cloning into 'chromium'... > remote: Sending approximately 2.11 GiB ... >

Re: Notation for current branch?

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 05:58:18PM +0800, ryenus wrote: > I wonder if there's an easy to use notation to refer to the current branch? > which is expected be friendly to scripting. > > For HEAD, there's @, which is short and concise. > > But for the current branch, it seems one has to either use

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 03:23:23PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> writes: > > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:26:13PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > >> > >> > Don't th

[PATCH v4 1/2] t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable

the entire string to not give the impression we want shell splitting to affect the other variables. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> --- t/t5100-mailinfo.sh | 68 +++-- 1 file

[PATCH v4 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

that they don't show up in the author field. Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> --- mailinfo.c | 82 t/t5100-mailinfo.sh | 14 t/t5100/comment.expect

[PATCH v4 0/2] Handle RFC2822 quoted-pairs in From header

Changes since v3: - t5100-mailinfo: Reverted back to capital $DATA - t5100-mailinfo: Moved quotes to around the entire string, instead of the variable, as per Junio's suggestion Kevin Daudt (2): t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair

Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] t5100-mailinfo: replace common path prefix with variable

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 01:21:13PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> writes: > > > Many tests need to store data in a file, and repeat the same pattern to > > refer to that path: > > > > "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/t5100/ >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mailinfo: unescape quoted-pair in header fields

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:38:42AM +0200, Jakub Narębski wrote: > W dniu 25.09.2016 o 22:17, Kevin Daudt pisze: > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 12:15:41AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > >> Oops, yes. It is beginning to make the "strbuf_swap()" look less > >> co

Re: "Purposes, Concepts,Misfits, and a Redesign of Git" (a research paper)

On Sat, Oct 01, 2016 at 12:24:57AM +0200, Jakub Narębski wrote: > > | 7.2.1 Discussion > [...] > | There could be other use cases for the > | staging area that Gitless doesn’t handle well but we expect > | these to be fairly infrequent. > > Like handling merge conflict...??? Infrequent doesn't

Re: Automagic `git checkout branchname` mysteriously fails

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 04:25:49PM -0400, Martin Langhoff wrote: > In a (private) repo project I have, I recently tried (and failed) to do: > > git checkout v4.1-support > > getting a "pathspec did not match any files known to git" error. > > There's an origin/v4.1-support, there is no

Re: [ANNOUNCE] git-log-compact v1.0

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 05:13:34PM -0700, Kyle J. McKay wrote: > > The project page with detailed help and many screen shots is located at: > > https://mackyle.github.io/git-log-compact/ > > Alternatively the repository can be cloned from: > > https://github.com/mackyle/git-log-compact.git

Re: Bug? git worktree fails with master on bare repo

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 08:06:47AM -0500, Michael Tutty wrote: > > > If source repo's HEAD is "master", I got the same behavior (worktree add > > fails) > > So if it's possible for a bare repo to have HEAD pointing at master, > is there a safe way for me to change this (e.g., as a cleanup step

Re: git branches & merge

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 04:43:07PM +0200, Anatoly Borodin wrote: > Hi, > > > the IP will not be overwritten, you'll still have the new IP in > master. Nothing to worry about :) > > To expand on that, git does a so called 3-way merge. This means git will look for a common base commit, and

Re: Formatting problem send_mail in version 2.10.0

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 07:13:22PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 01:53:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Matthieu Moy writes: > > > > >>> If it's not in the body of the message, then where is it? > > >> > > >> This point is clarified in

Re: Uninitialized submodules as symlinks

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 06:10:17PM +0200, Heiko Voigt wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 06:17:05PM +, David Turner wrote: > > Presently, uninitialized submodules are materialized in the working > > tree as empty directories. We would like to consider having them be > > symlinks. Specifically,

Re: "git add -p ." raises an unexpected "warning: empty strings as pathspecs will be made invalid in upcoming releases. please use . instead if you meant to match all paths"

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 12:31:49PM -0800, Peter Urda wrote: > After upgrading to version 2.11.0 I am getting a warning about empty > strings as pathspecs while using 'patch' > > - Ran 'git add -p .' from the root of my git repository. > > - I was able to normally stage my changes, but was

Re: GIT_EXEC_PATH

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:47:14PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote: > Hi! > > Concerning $GIT_EXEC_PATH .. is that supposed to be a $PATh like variable? as > in can it have more than one path (colon-separated)? I have currently two > directories there (one with a git-annex installation, one with

Re: FW: Issue in gitbash changing directory

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:48:09PM +, Bonk, Gregory wrote: > > I accidently typed 'cd //'  and it worked. > > gbonk@ICC11167 MINGW64 /c/git/mtb-messagehub-information-radiator (master) > $ cd // > > gbonk@ICC11167 MINGW64 // > $ cd .. This has very little to do with git, but more with bash

Re: git clean -fdx deletes tracked files

On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 08:45:20PM +0200, Kim Birkelund wrote: > Hi > > I hope this is gonna sound as weird to you as it does to me. > > The link below is a zip of a small git repository that I can reproduce > the bug in on 2 machines. > > Repo:

[PATCH v2] stash: prevent warning about null bytes in input

-stash: line 43: warning: command substitution: ignored null byte in input Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> --- git-stash.sh | 11 +-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-stash.sh b/git-stash.sh index 9b6c2da7b..5f09a47f0 100755 --- a/git-st

Re: [PATCH] stash: prevent warning about null bytes in input

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:51:26PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kevin Daudt <m...@ikke.info> writes: > > > The no_changes function calls the untracked_files function through > > command substitution. untracked_files will return null bytes because it > > runs

  1   2   3   >