Re: inotify support, nearly there

2014-01-28 Thread Mike Hommey
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 01:47:30PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > Just a quick update for the enthusiasts. My branch file-watcher [1] > has got working per-user inotify support. It's a 20 patch series so > I'll refrain from spamming git@vger for a while, even though it hurts > your eyes a lot less than

inotify support, nearly there

2014-01-28 Thread Duy Nguyen
Just a quick update for the enthusiasts. My branch file-watcher [1] has got working per-user inotify support. It's a 20 patch series so I'll refrain from spamming git@vger for a while, even though it hurts your eyes a lot less than what I have posted so far. The test suite ran fine with it so it's

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] diff: turn skip_stat_unmatch on selectively

2014-01-28 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 02:51:45PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> This replaces 'diff: turn off skip_stat_unmatch on "diff --cached"' > >> The previous patch obviously leaves skip_stat_unmatch on in "diff > >> " and maybe other cases. > > > > Oops, I lost track. Sorry. > > Together with {1

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] diff: turn skip_stat_unmatch on selectively

2014-01-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano writes: > Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: > >> skip_stat_unmatch flag is added in fb13227 (git-diff: squelch "empty" >> diffs - 2007-08-03) to ignore empty diffs caused by stat-only >> dirtiness. In some diff case, stat is not involved at all. While >> the code is written in a way t

Re: [PATCH v2] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread David Sharp
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 28.01.2014 22:21, schrieb David Sharp: >> @@ -738,9 +740,12 @@ int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const >> char *prefix) >> continue; >> } >> if (!strcm

Re: [PATCH v2] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread David Sharp
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > David Sharp writes: > >> Without this patch, git-rev-parse --prefix, --default, or >> --resolve-git-dir, without a value argument, would result in a segfault. >> Instead, die() with a message. > > When I sent the review message, I actually

Re: [PATCH v2] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 28.01.2014 22:21, schrieb David Sharp: > @@ -738,9 +740,12 @@ int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const > char *prefix) > continue; > } > if (!strcmp(arg, "--resolve-git-dir")) { > -

Re: [PATCH 3/4] combine-diff: Optimize combine_diff_path sets intersection

2014-01-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
Kirill Smelkov writes: > diff --git a/combine-diff.c b/combine-diff.c > index 3b92c448..98c2562 100644 > --- a/combine-diff.c > +++ b/combine-diff.c > @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ > ... > + while (1) { > ... > + if (cmp < 0) { > + if (pprev) > +

Re: [PATCH v2] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
David Sharp writes: > Without this patch, git-rev-parse --prefix, --default, or > --resolve-git-dir, without a value argument, would result in a segfault. > Instead, die() with a message. When I sent the review message, I actually was on the fence between checking i vs argc and checking the null

Re: [PATCH] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread David Sharp
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > David Sharp writes: > >> @@ -738,9 +740,11 @@ int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const >> char *prefix) >> continue; >> } >> if (!strcmp(arg, "--resolve

[PATCH v2] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread David Sharp
Without this patch, git-rev-parse --prefix, --default, or --resolve-git-dir, without a value argument, would result in a segfault. Instead, die() with a message. Signed-off-by: David Sharp --- builtin/rev-parse.c | 17 +++-- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --gi

Re: [PATCH] rev-parse: Check argc before using argv[i+1]

2014-01-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
David Sharp writes: > @@ -738,9 +740,11 @@ int cmd_rev_parse(int argc, const char **argv, const > char *prefix) > continue; > } > if (!strcmp(arg, "--resolve-git-dir")) { > - const char *gitdir

Re: [PATCH 3/4] combine-diff: Optimize combine_diff_path sets intersection

2014-01-28 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 08:20:40PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: [...] > @@ -1343,6 +1374,26 @@ void diff_tree_combined(const unsigned char *sha1, > if (p->len) > num_paths++; > } > + > + /* order paths according to diffcore_order */ > + if (opt->or

Re: Having Git follow symlinks

2014-01-28 Thread Johan Herland
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Peter Krefting wrote: > Is there a (per-repo) setting to get Git to follow symlinks in the working > directory, i.e., to not store the symlinks themselves but rather work on > what they point to? Not that I know of. > Background: I have a repository that stores a

Having Git follow symlinks

2014-01-28 Thread Peter Krefting
Hi! Is there a (per-repo) setting to get Git to follow symlinks in the working directory, i.e., to not store the symlinks themselves but rather work on what they point to? Background: I have a repository that stores a number of my dotfiles, shared between all my machines (Linux, OSX, Windows

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v1.9-rc0

2014-01-28 Thread Kacper Kornet
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 10:58:29AM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > Kacper Kornet wrote: > > The change in release numbering also breaks down gitolite v2 setups. One > > of the gitolite commands, gl-compile-conf, expects the output of git > > --version > > to match /git version (\d+)\.(\d+

Re: [PATCH/WIP v2 00/14] inotify support

2014-01-28 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Thomas Rast wrote: > There's also the problem of ordering guarantees between the socket and > inotify. I haven't found any, so I would conservatively assume that the > socket messages may in fact arrive before inotify, which is a race in > the current code. E.g.

Running "make rpm" fails on a CentOS 6.3 machine

2014-01-28 Thread Erez Zilber
Hi, I'm trying to build the git RPM (using tag v1.8.5.3) on a CentOS 6.3 64 bit machine. I was able to run 'make', but then I fail when running 'make rpm'. Can anyone help with the following error? [erez.zilber@erez-lx:~/work/ git]$ make rpm sed -e 's/@@VERSION@@/1.8.5.3/g' < git.spec.in > git.sp

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

2014-01-28 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jeff King writes: > The git-repack command always passes `--honor-pack-keep` > to pack-objects. This has traditionally been a good thing, > as we do not want to duplicate those objects in a new pack, > and we are not going to delete the old pack. > ... > Note that this option just disables the pa