Re: Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-15 Thread Alex Riesen
On 4/15/05, Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > + if (update_mode && changed & MODE_CHANGED) > > > + chmod(ce->name, ce->st_mode); > > > > it's "if ((update_mode && changed) & MODE_CHANGED)" > > Did you really mean that? > > No, '&' have a higher p

Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Paul Jackson
> No, '&' have a higher priority (weight?) than '&&'. & has a higher precedence than && C Operator Precedence and Associativity http://www.difranco.net/cop2220/op-prec.htm and many others -- google for 'c operator precedence' Where the bitops &, | and ^ bite you is that they are lower prece

Re: Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:35 +0200, Alex Riesen wrote: > On 4/14/05, Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > + if (update_mode && changed & MODE_CHANGED) > > + chmod(ce->name, ce->st_mode); > > it's "if ((update_mode && changed) & MODE_CHANGED)" > Did you

Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 01:09 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 01:00 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > Dear diary, on Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:01:27AM CEST, I got a letter > > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > > > On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:42 +0200, Petr Bau

Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 01:00 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Dear diary, on Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:01:27AM CEST, I got a letter > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > > On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:42 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:40:09AM CES

Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Petr Baudis
Dear diary, on Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:01:27AM CEST, I got a letter where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:42 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:40:09AM CEST, I got a letter > > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:42 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:40:09AM CEST, I got a letter > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > > (PS, can you check the fact that your mail client keeps on adding a 'Re: > > ' ...) > > Hmm. I guess my ancie

Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Petr Baudis
Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:40:09AM CEST, I got a letter where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > (PS, can you check the fact that your mail client keeps on adding a 'Re: > ' ...) Hmm. I guess my ancient reply_regexp "^((\\[|\\()([^B]|B([^u]|u([^g]|g([^ ]|AnTiMaTcH))

Re: Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Alex Riesen
On 4/14/05, Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > + if (update_mode && changed & MODE_CHANGED) > + chmod(ce->name, ce->st_mode); it's "if ((update_mode && changed) & MODE_CHANGED)" Did you really mean that? -alex - To unsubscribe from this list: send th

Re: Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 11:40 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 11:11 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > Please trim the replied mails a bit, snipping old and irrelevant parts. > > This is insane. :-) > > > > Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 10:38:25AM CEST, I got a letter > > whe

Re: Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
(PS, can you check the fact that your mail client keeps on adding a 'Re: ' ...) On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 11:11 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Please trim the replied mails a bit, snipping old and irrelevant parts. > This is insane. :-) > > Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 10:38:25AM CEST, I got a le

Re: Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Petr Baudis
Please trim the replied mails a bit, snipping old and irrelevant parts. This is insane. :-) Dear diary, on Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 10:38:25AM CEST, I got a letter where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... ..snip.. > Normalize show-diff output, add --update-modes target to update-cach

Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 10:28 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 08:55 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 00:19 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > Dear diary, on Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:15:37PM CEST, I got a letter > > > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-14 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 08:55 +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 00:19 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > Dear diary, on Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:15:37PM CEST, I got a letter > > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > > > On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 11:26 +0200, Petr Bau

Re: Re: Re: Remove need to untrack before tracking new branch

2005-04-13 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 00:19 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Dear diary, on Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:15:37PM CEST, I got a letter > where Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that... > > On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 11:26 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > >> > Dear diary, on Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 10:41:12AM CE