On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 11:43:33 -0700, Skip Tavakkolian
wrote:
> is this an equivalent fix for 9legacy env? (i'm guessing the answer is no)
>
> % diff clone /bin/git/clone
> 75c75
> < for(f in `$nl{walk -f $tree | sed 's@^'$tree'/*@@'}){
> ---
> > for(f in `{ifs=$nl walk -f $tree | sed
the reason for this addition was a bug I found in coraid usage of rc scrips where one script set ifs, and called another which did not reset ifs. in retrospect this appears to be a regression over the Bourne she'll due to the elimination of export. anyway, rather than forcing all scripts to
yes, that's my change and it was introduced in 9atom, along with allowing newlines within lists.- erikOn Aug 5, 2019 11:43, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:is this an equivalent fix for 9legacy env? (i'm guessing the answer is no)% diff clone /bin/git/clone75c75< for(f in `$nl{walk -f $tree | sed
is this an equivalent fix for 9legacy env? (i'm guessing the answer is no)
% diff clone /bin/git/clone
75c75
< for(f in `$nl{walk -f $tree | sed 's@^'$tree'/*@@'}){
---
> for(f in `{ifs=$nl walk -f $tree | sed 's@^'$tree'/*@@'}){
also, the earliest reference to `$split{...}` notation i found is
On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 16:06:54 -0500
clue...@tonymendoza.us wrote:
> Thanks Ori!
>
> I pulled it down today and started using it against a few GitHub repos I
> have. For those who are thinking about using it, it only uses 'git' and
> 'git+ssh' style URLs, but they work so far without incident.
Thanks Ori!
I pulled it down today and started using it against a few GitHub repos I have.
For those who are thinking about using it, it only uses 'git' and 'git+ssh'
style URLs, but they work so far without incident.
git/clone git+ssh://g...@github.com:tmendoza/9front-user
Once I got keys
I agree 100%, well done Ori, I will be trying this soon,
I am in the process of changing jobs at the moment so
I am a bit distracted but the new job will include git so I
Will be needing it.
-Steve
> On 12 Jul 2019, at 19:27, Patrick Marchand wrote:
>
> Hi Ori,
>
> On 07/08, Ori Bernstein
Hi Ori,
On 07/08, Ori Bernstein wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 21:41:09 -0700
> o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
>
> > It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
> > more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
> > many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
> >
On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 21:41:09 -0700
o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
> It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
> more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
> many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
> "the rest is just scripting".
An update: I'm now using
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 13:23:08 -0700
Ori Bernstein wrote:
> - I can remove the libavl usage, possibly replacing with
> the objset implementation I already have.
Did this one. Turned out to save a couple of lines, in the end.
--
Ori Bernstein
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 05:00:15PM -0700, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> 9front maintainers, can anyone speak to technical reasons for creating a
> new version rather than fixing existing? Also, any thoughts on changing the
> name slightly so they can both be on the same system? maybe libAVL?
In 2016
I now realize there are two different libavl's. It's easy enough to copy
from 9front repo (hopefully there are no cascading dependencies).
9front maintainers, can anyone speak to technical reasons for creating a
new version rather than fixing existing? Also, any thoughts on changing the
name
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:29:30 -0700
Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The avl library doesn't match up to 9legacy version. Any ideas?
Looking at a few options. I can just say "well, patch it", but it'd
be nice to see the various plan9s playing better with each other.
There are a few options.
> The avl library doesn't match up to 9legacy version. Any ideas?
>
> BTW, I think your notes on this message are a great start for a README.
git9 seems to use 9front's libavl, which is a rewrite of Plan 9's libavl.
9legacy uses the original Plan9's libavl.
Please try this patch:
On Wed, 03 Apr 2019 16:59:22 +
Giacomo wrote:
> On April 3, 2019 4:02:49 PM UTC, o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
> >Don't particularly care. At some point I'd like to commit it to 9front,
> >but I can relicense it then.
> >
> >Do you have a preference?
>
> Probably MIT or a BSD.
>
> But I can
>Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2019 10:08 AM
>>On April 3, 2019 4:02:49 PM UTC, o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
>>Don't particularly care. At some point I'd like to commit it to 9front,
>>but I can relicense it then.
>>
>>Do you have a preference?
>
>Probably MIT or a BSD.
>
>But I can also live with
Hi,
The avl library doesn't match up to 9legacy version. Any ideas?
BTW, I think your notes on this message are a great start for a README.
Thanks,
-Skip
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 9:48 PM wrote:
> It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
> more or less at the point where it
On April 3, 2019 4:02:49 PM UTC, o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
>Don't particularly care. At some point I'd like to commit it to 9front,
>but I can relicense it then.
>
>Do you have a preference?
Probably MIT or a BSD.
But I can also live with any copyleft of your choice.
Giacomo
> Impressive!
>
> I didn't imagine one could implement git in so few lines of C! Thanks for
> challenging my assumptions!
>
> I'd like to port it to Jehanne but I cannot find a license in the repository,
> so in theory it's "all rights reserved" under most jurisdictions.
>
> What's your
On April 2, 2019 4:41:09 AM UTC, o...@eigenstate.org wrote:
>It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
>more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
>many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
>"the rest is just scripting".
>
>One caveat I have: Git's
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 12:49 AM wrote:
>> One caveat I have: Git's index file format is a bit
>> boneheaded, so I'm ignoring it. The index doesn't affect
>> the wire protocol, so this isn't an interoperability issue,
>> unless you share the same physical repository on both
>> Plan 9 and Unix.
Cool! It's very interesting what implement Git in native Plan 9 style to me.
2019年4月2日(火) 13:48 :
>
> It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
> more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
> many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
> "the rest is just
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 12:49 AM wrote:
> One caveat I have: Git's index file format is a bit
> boneheaded, so I'm ignoring it. The index doesn't affect
> the wire protocol, so this isn't an interoperability issue,
> unless you share the same physical repository on both
> Plan 9 and Unix. If you
Very cool! Thank you.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 9:48 PM wrote:
> It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
> more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
> many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
> "the rest is just scripting".
>
> One caveat I have:
excellent work! thank you!
--
cinap
It was mentioned on this list a short while ago. Now, it's
more or less at the point where it works for me. Expect
many bugs and problems, and many more missing tools, but
"the rest is just scripting".
One caveat I have: Git's index file format is a bit
boneheaded, so I'm ignoring it. The index
26 matches
Mail list logo
