On Thursday 21 April 2005 01:11 am, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 02:20:27AM CEST, I got a letter
> where Steven Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> > Actually, I meant "patch -p1 <stuff_from_above".
> So, how did it end up?
The file listed in the diff was already patched, so applying that
output does the expected:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] git-pasky-0.6.2-damaged]$ patch -p1 <xyzzy.diff
patching file gitcancel.sh
Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Assume -R? [n] n
Apply anyway? [n] n
1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving rejects to file gitcancel.sh.rej
> Actually, never mind. I forgot that I bring the local changes forward as
> patches instead. So this is Harmless (tm). It means the patch containing
> your local changes has just that kind of git diff output containing
> filename: hash. I will probably just chain grep -v '^[^+-@ ]' in front
> of patch. (Someone starting his filename with a space _deserves_ the
> trouble. ;-)
> > But before doing that, I did a fsck-cache as follows, with these results.
> > This seems damaged.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] git-pasky-0.6.2]$ fsck-cache --unreachable $(cat
> > .git/HEAD)
> You can't do just this. In Cogito repository, you may have multiple
> branches, each with different HEAD of course. So you need to
> fsck-cache --unreachable $(cat .git/heads/*)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] git-pasky-0.6.2]$ fsck-cache $(cat .git/heads/*)
dangling commit 2c1a8048d56cfbe0ff8a3d04c12d06f3832e7edc
dangling commit a387546d148df5718a9c53bbe0cbea441e793d98
dangling blob d6ff9de73fc920cf1f27afac82571c4c58526b80
[EMAIL PROTECTED] git-pasky-0.6.2]$ ./git-prune-script
Ah, yes. Prune juice.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] git-pasky-0.6.2]$ fsck-cache --unreachable $(cat .git/heads/*)
Now, all is well. Sorry for the noise.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html