Re: Fix git-rev-parse breakage

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
 that is not a right thing so get rid of that assumption (which
 I agree is a good change, and the last sentense says
 opposite...

Well, the patch makes it an _explicit_ assumption, instead of a very 
subtly hidden one from the code-flow. It was the non-obvious hidden 
assumption that caused the bug.

 Here is my thinking, requesting for a sanity check.
 
 * git-whatchanged wants to use it to tell rev-list arguments
   from rev-tree arguments.  You _do_ want to pick --max-count=10
   or --merge-order in this case, and --revs-only implying
   --no-flags would make this impossible.

Fair enough. However, there are two kinds of flags: the revision flags, 
and the -p kind of flags.

And the problem was that git-whatchanged -p didn't work any more,
because we passed -p along to git-rev-list. Gaah.

Linus
-
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

Fix git-rev-parse breakage

[Linus Torvalds]

The --flags cleanup caused problems: we used to depend on the fact that 
revs_only magically suppressed flags, adn that assumption was broken by 
the recent fixes.

It wasn't a good assumption in the first place, so instead of 
re-introducing it, let's just get rid of it.

This makes --revs-only imply --no-flags.

[ Side note: we might want to get rid of these confusing two-way flags, 
  where some flags say only print xxx, and others say don't print yyy. 
  We'd be better off with just three flags that say print zzz, where zzz
  is one of flags, revs, norevs ]

Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff --git a/rev-parse.c b/rev-parse.c
--- a/rev-parse.c
+++ b/rev-parse.c
@@ -160,6 +160,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
}
if (!strcmp(arg, --revs-only)) {
revs_only = 1;
+   no_flags = 1;
continue;
}
if (!strcmp(arg, --no-revs)) {
-
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

Re: Fix git-rev-parse breakage

[Junio C Hamano]

Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 This makes --revs-only imply --no-flags.

 [ Side note: we might want to get rid of these confusing two-way flags, 
   where some flags say only print xxx, and others say don't print yyy. 
   We'd be better off with just three flags that say print zzz, where zzz
   is one of flags, revs, norevs ]

I suspect that would not fly too well.

Being able to say give me all flags meant for rev-list, give
me all what are meant for rev-list, and give me all non-flags
that are meant for rev-list are very handy, so I'd rather want
to see --revs-only to mean meant for rev-list, --no-revs to
mean not meant for rev-list, --flags to mean only ones that
start with a '-', and --no-flags to mean only ones that do not
start with a '-'.  And that would give me (rev/no-rev/lack
thereof) x (flag/no-flag/lack thereof) = 9 combinations.



-
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