Hi,
wrong mailing list for Windows questions. This is the correct one:
http://groups.google.com/group/msysgit
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 04:43:27PM -0700, J.V. wrote:
What is the best way to host a shared git repo on a Windows 2008
box? I would like to create a repo on the 2008 box (that
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 04:54:39PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
This is primarily to scratch my own itch; after tagging an rc or
final release, I've been doing
git push k.org v1.8.2
git push k.org
and the first step can easily be forgotten. With
git push
Commit fea16b47b60 (Fri Jan 11 19:48:43 2013, Manlio Perillo,
git-completion.bash: add support for path completion), introduced a new
__gitcomp_file function that uses the bash builtin compgen. The
function was redefined for ZSH in the deprecated section of
git-completion.bash, but not in the new
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:46:48PM +0100, David Krmpotic wrote:
We started working on a .NET app and the XML project file (.csproj)
got corrupted (a few closing tag missing).
79 Compile Include=SlovaricaForm.Designer.cs
80 DependentUponSlovaricaForm.cs/DependentUpon
81
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 04:03:26AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
You might be able to get by with a version of the union driver that
asks the 3-way merge driver to be less aggressive about shrinking the
conflict blocks. For example, with this patch to git:
diff --git a/ll-merge.c b/ll-merge.c
In a usual set-up, an access to git@server:javier/pfc will first
locate the home directory for the user git (the token before @),
and then its subdirectory javier/pfc, e.g. /home/git/javier/pfc,
while an access to server:javier/pfc will first locate the home
directory of whatever username the
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Jari Pennanen jari.penna...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/3/4 Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr:
There is already core.excludesfile, which does not replace the usual
.gitignore but comes in addition. The common use is a user-wide ignore
file, not a per-directory
2013/3/5 David Aguilar dav...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Jari Pennanen jari.penna...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm actually aware of that. Problem is the normal .gitignore files
must *not* be used in the second GIT_DIR at all, in my case it's for
syncing so I need to sync almost all
On 04.03.13 19:15, Robert Irelan wrote:
Hello all:
This is my first time posting to this mailing list, but it appears to
me, through a Google search, that this is where you go to report what
might be bugs. I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but it is
mysterious to me.
My git
OK new try. This
- no longer requires 1/5 (i'll resend full series later when the
wanted behavior is found)
- shows either detached from or detached at. We could even do 4
commits from detached point XXX, like we do 5 commits ahead of
upstream. But I'm not sure if we should do that.
-
On 03/05/2013 09:22 AM, Jeff King wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 04:54:39PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
[...]
This will find anything under refs/tags, including annotated and
non-annotated tags. I wonder if it is worth making a distinction. In
many workflows, unannotated tags should not be
Hello,
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:30:04PM +0100, Michael Weiser wrote:
Support determining the binaries' installation path at runtime even if
called without any path components (i.e. via search path). Implement
fallback to compiled-in prefix if determination fails or is impossible.
I see
Duy Nguyen pclo...@gmail.com writes:
- # Not currently on any branch.
+ # Detached at $ONTO
Without the context, I don't think Detached alone says something to
the user. Detached HEAD at ... would IMHO be clearer and at least give
the user enough keywords to search the web/doc for an
Commit d8cf908c (config.mak.in: remove unused definitions) removed
exec_prefix = @exec_prefix@
from config.mak.in, because nobody directly used ${exec_prefix}, but
overlooked that other autoconf definitions could indirectly expand that
variable.
For example the following snippet from
Change the semantics of git alias --help to show the help for the
command alias is aliased to, instead of just saying:
`git alias' is aliased to `whatever'
E.g. if you have checkout aliased to co you won't get:
$ git co --help
`git co' is aliased to `checkout'
But will instead get
rab...@rabbit.us wrote on Mon, 04 Mar 2013 10:29 +1100:
I was tinkering with a massive git repository (actually a bup
repository, but it is a standard valid git repo underneath). While
validating that a repack ran succesfully I executed the command:
git rev-list --objects --all rev.list
Yes, you're correct, it was a bug in my pre-commit hook. Thanks!
For posterity, the issue is that I had the following line:
git diff -z --cached --name-only | egrep -z '\.(pl|pm|t)$' | \
while read -d'' -r f; do ...
In Bash, when `read` is passed the `-d` option with a
Nope, it was a bug in my pre-commit hook. See the other response to this
message.
Robert Irelan | Server Systems | Epic | (608) 271-9000
-Original Message-
From: Torsten Bögershausen [mailto:tbo...@web.de]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 4:41 AM
To: Robert Irelan
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Am 3/5/2013 15:44, schrieb Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason:
Change the semantics of git alias --help to show the help for the
command alias is aliased to, instead of just saying:
`git alias' is aliased to `whatever'
E.g. if you have checkout aliased to co you won't get:
$ git co --help
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
I think the merge will produce the results you are looking for. This
would have to be configurable, though, as it is a regression for
existing users of union, which would want the duplicate-line
suppression (or maybe not; it will only catch such duplicates at
Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes:
+if test -z $force
+then
+git rm -n $sm_path ||
+die $(eval_gettext Submodule work tree
'\$sm_path' contains local modifications; use '-f' to discard them)
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
Should this be called --follow-tags? That makes more sense to me, as
you are catching all tags.
Perhaps. We are sending all zero-or-more relevant tags, so I agree
that plural form is more appropriate. I have a doubt about
follow, though; inertia made me use
Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 03:00:45PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
So if you want a single boolean to toggle between the current
behaviour and the other one, it would be --post-order. But you may
at least want to consider pros and cons of allowing users to
Michael Weiser m.wei...@science-computing.de writes:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:30:04PM +0100, Michael Weiser wrote:
Support determining the binaries' installation path at runtime even if
called without any path components (i.e. via search path). Implement
fallback to compiled-in prefix if
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com writes:
Change the semantics of git alias --help to show the help for the
command alias is aliased to, instead of just saying:
`git alias' is aliased to `whatever'
E.g. if you have checkout aliased to co you won't get:
$ git co --help
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com writes:
Change the semantics of git alias --help to show the help for the
command alias is aliased to, instead of just saying:
`git alias' is aliased to `whatever'
E.g. if
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 03:00:45PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
So if you want a single boolean to toggle between the current
behaviour and the other one, it would be --post-order.
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com writes:
No objection to the patch in principle though? I.e. not showing you
what the alias points to.
I am not interested enough to even strongly object to such a change,
because it is not reasonable to react with a I know! to the output
of git co
Matthieu Moy matthieu@imag.fr writes:
Commit fea16b47b60 (Fri Jan 11 19:48:43 2013, Manlio Perillo,
git-completion.bash: add support for path completion), introduced a new
__gitcomp_file function that uses the bash builtin compgen. The
function was redefined for ZSH in the deprecated
Thanks.
--
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
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 07:58:45AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
This will find anything under refs/tags, including annotated and
non-annotated tags. I wonder if it is worth making a distinction. In
many workflows, unannotated tags should not be leaked out to public
repos. But because this
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:44:41PM +, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
Change the semantics of git alias --help to show the help for the
command alias is aliased to, instead of just saying:
`git alias' is aliased to `whatever'
E.g. if you have checkout aliased to co you won't get:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 07:44:13AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
I think the merge will produce the results you are looking for. This
would have to be configurable, though, as it is a regression for
existing users of union, which would want the
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
But I wonder if fetching and pushing are different in that respect. You
are (usually) fetching from a public publishing point, and it is assumed
that whatever is there is useful for sharing. The only reason to limit
it is to save time transferring objects the
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:15:20AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
But I wonder if fetching and pushing are different in that respect. You
are (usually) fetching from a public publishing point, and it is assumed
that whatever is there is useful for sharing.
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 12:49:57PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:
One obvious alternative is only to push annotated tags with this
feature. That has the downside of not matching fetch's behavior, as well
as withholding the feature from people whose workflow uses only
unannotated tags.
Eric Cousineau eacousin...@gmail.com writes:
Would these be the correct behaviors of Heiko's implementation?
I do not think Heiko already has an implementation, but let's try to
see how each example makes sense.
git submodule foreach # Empty command, pre-order
git submodule foreach
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
I'm also not sure how useful those really are in practice. I have not
used union myself ever. And in the example that started this thread, I
find the use of union slightly dubious.
Yeah, I do not think anybody sane used union outside toy examples.
IIRC, it was
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
Yeah, I think that is another sensible variant. It does not really
backfill in the way that Junio's patch does (e.g., if you forgot to
push out v1.6 to a remote 2 weeks ago and now you are pushing out v1.7,
Junio's patch will magically fill it in).
I may have
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 11:17:11AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I may have tentatively tagged the tip of 'master' as v1.8.2 in my
private repository, started the integration testing, but may not be
confident enough to push out the branch nor the tag yet. I may have
an experimental topic that
Am 05.03.2013 19:34, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Eric Cousineau eacousin...@gmail.com writes:
Would these be the correct behaviors of Heiko's implementation?
I do not think Heiko already has an implementation, but let's try to
see how each example makes sense.
git submodule foreach # Empty
On 03/05/2013 07:47 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
I'm also not sure how useful those really are in practice. I have not
used union myself ever. And in the example that started this thread, I
find the use of union slightly dubious.
Yeah, I do not think anybody
Hello,
Is there any hook in Git similar to start-commit subversion hook? The
requirements would be:
1- A hook on the server side (as pre-receive)
2- It will execute the actions *before* the begin of transaction
(pre-receive hook needs the references already pushed before).
For example, it would
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Jens Lehmann jens.lehm...@web.de wrote:
Am 05.03.2013 19:34, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Eric Cousineau eacousin...@gmail.com writes:
...
I am not entirely convinced we would want --include-super in the
first place, though. It does not belong to submodule foreach;
From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com
I think this is to be expected for git rebase, as it does not even
look at merges. It is a way to find non-merge commits that haven't
been applied yet, and apply them to the upstream to create a new
linear history.
I disagree. git rebase is not
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:14:42PM +0100, Jose Garcia Juanino wrote:
Is there any hook in Git similar to start-commit subversion hook? The
requirements would be:
1- A hook on the server side (as pre-receive)
2- It will execute the actions *before* the begin of transaction
(pre-receive hook
Dale Worley wor...@c-66-31-108-177.hsd1.ma.comcast.net writes:
From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com
I think this is to be expected for git rebase, as it does not even
look at merges. It is a way to find non-merge commits that haven't
been applied yet, and apply them to the upstream to
In reflog expire we were not clearing the REACHABLE bit from
objects reachable from the tip of refs we marked earlier.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com
---
builtin/reflog.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/reflog.c b/builtin/reflog.c
From: Gene Thomas [DATACOM] gene.tho...@datacom.co.nz
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:05 AM
Philip,
Thanks for your reply.
The original branch is not 'destroyed', rather the pointer to the
previous tip is within the logs.
Is that the 'git log' log or internal logs? Are you sure? There
Thanks to everyone. The information was useful.
On 24 February 2013 21:31, Shawn Pearce spea...@spearce.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Thomas Koch tho...@koch.ro wrote:
Yuri Mikhailov:
Dear Git community,
I am a Software Developer and I have been using git for a while.
The primary change since the last round is that it pushes out only
annotated tags that are missing from the other side.
Junio C Hamano (4):
commit.c: add clear_commit_marks_many()
commit.c: add in_merge_bases_many()
commit.c: use clear_commit_marks_many() in in_merge_bases_many()
push:
clear_commit_marks(struct commit *, unsigned) only can clear flag
bits starting from a single commit; introduce an API to allow
feeding an array of commits, so that flag bits can be cleared from
commits reachable from any of them with a single traversal.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
Similar to in_merge_bases(commit, other) that returns true when
commit is an ancestor (i.e. in the merge bases between the two) of
the other commit, in_merge_bases_many(commit, n_other, other[])
checks if commit is an ancestor of any of the other[] commits.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com
---
commit.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/commit.c b/commit.c
index d12e799..b4512ab 100644
--- a/commit.c
+++ b/commit.c
@@ -876,8 +876,7 @@ int in_merge_bases_many(struct commit *commit, int
nr_reference,
The new option --follow-tags tells git push to push annotated
tags that are missing from the other side and that can be reached by
the history that is otherwise pushed out.
For example, if you are using the simple, current, or upstream
push, you would ordinarily push the history leading to the
From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 9:35 PM
Dale Worley wor...@c-66-31-108-177.hsd1.ma.comcast.net writes:
From: Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com
I think this is to be expected for git rebase, as it does not even
look at merges. It is a way to find non-merge
Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes:
Given that many folk appear to trip up with their rebase mindset, does
this suggest that a few tweaks to the manual may be in order to stop
such misunderstandings?
Perhaps.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 07:45:22AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net writes:
+ if test -z $force
+ then
+ git rm -n $sm_path ||
+ die $(eval_gettext Submodule work tree
If take_worktree_changes is true, then the logic around
option_with_implicit_dot ensures argc is positive by this point.
So require_pathspec never has an effect.
Signed-off-by: Greg Price pr...@mit.edu
---
builtin/add.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
The documentation of '-A' is very confusing for someone who doesn't
already know what it does. In particular, it describes the option's
meaning by reference to that of '-u', but it's no more similar to the
latter than it is to the default behavior. Describe it directly (and
in a way that uses
60 matches
Mail list logo
