Jeff King writes:
> Out of curiosity, do you actually use --show-all for anything?
Absolutely not. I'd actually love it if I could say "not anymore"
instead, but I haven't had an opportunity to debug the revision
traversal code for quite some time so I do not even remember when
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 02:22:05PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > I think that repeating the oid is intentional; the point is to dump how
> > the traversal code is hitting the endpoints, even if we do so multiple
> > times.
> >
> > The --oneline behavior just looks like a bug. I think --format
Jeff King writes:
> I think that repeating the oid is intentional; the point is to dump how
> the traversal code is hitting the endpoints, even if we do so multiple
> times.
>
> The --oneline behavior just looks like a bug. I think --format is broken
> with --show-all, too (it
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 09:13:22AM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > So there it is. It does show commits multiple times, but suppresses the
> > verbose header after the first showing. If we do something like this:
> >
> >git rev-list --show-all --pretty --boundary c93150cfb0^-
> >
> >
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 01:48:11PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> > What confuses me about this behavior is that the OID is still shown on the
> > repeat (and in the case of `git log --oneline` will not actually have a line
> > break between two short-OIDs). I don't believe this behavior is something
On 2/20/2018 5:57 PM, Jeff King wrote:
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 05:12:50PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
In rev-list, the "--header" option outputs a value and expects the buffer to
be cached. It outputs the header info only if get_cached_commit_buffer()
returns a non-null buffer, giving
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 05:12:50PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> In rev-list, the "--header" option outputs a value and expects the buffer to
> be cached. It outputs the header info only if get_cached_commit_buffer()
> returns a non-null buffer, giving incorrect output. If it called
>
7 matches
Mail list logo