Matthieu Moy <> writes:

> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <> writes:
>> --- a/t/
>> +++ b/t/
>> @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ test_expect_success 'bisect start: existing 
>> ".git/BISECT_START" not modified if
>>      cp .git/BISECT_START saved &&
>>      test_must_fail git bisect start $HASH4 foo -- &&
>>      git branch > branch.output &&
>> -    test_i18ngrep "* (no branch)" branch.output > /dev/null &&
>> +    test_i18ngrep "* (bisecting other)" branch.output > /dev/null &&
> I'd have spelled it (no branch, bisecting other) to make it clear that
> we're on detached HEAD, and avoid confusing old-timers. But maybe your
> version is enough, I'm not sure.

Yeah, I do not think "bisecting other" alone makes much sense.

What does "other" refer to when you start your bisection at a
detached head?  I personally think "other" has _any_ value in that
message, because "(no branch, bisecting)" gives the same amount of
information, especially because "other" does not say which branch it
refers to at all.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to