Re: [PATCH] specify encoding for sed command

>> I think the best way to move forward with this is a new patch that uses >> `awk` instead of `sed`: I tested several `awk` variants and the command >> was portable without requiring any changes to LANG or LC_ALL. >> >> Does that sound like a good plan? > > No ;) > Could you please give the

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:14 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So I just had an interesting experience that has happened before too, > but this time I decided to try to figure out *why* it happened. > > include/linux/mm.h > > and yeah, that rather core header file

Re: [PATCH] specify encoding for sed command

> I did a little more digging into this issue today. > The issue isn't actually caused by `sed`: it's caused by the way that > the `set` builtin outputs characters in the Unicode Private Use Area > (PUA) in the build of Bash 3.2.57 that macOS Sierra ships with. > > Powerline uses several PUA

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

[ Still talking to myself. Very soothing. ] On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > [ Talking to myself ] > > Did it perhaps mean to say > > path_renamed_outside_HEAD = path2 && !strcmp(path, path2); > > instead? Probably not

Re: [RFC 02/10] submodule: fix getting custom gitmodule file in fetch command

Hi Antonio, the subject line could also be fetch: fix custom submodule location as I was not expecting this patch from the subject line. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Antonio Ospite wrote: > Import the default git configuration before accessing the gitmodules > file. > > This

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

[ Talking to myself ] On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Oddly, that *already* has the check: > > if (mfi.clean && !df_conflict_remains && > oid_eq(, a_oid) && mfi.mode == a_mode) { > int

Re: [RFC 01/10] submodule: add 'core.submodulesFile' to override the '.gitmodules' path

Hi Antonio, On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Antonio Ospite wrote: > When multiple repositories with detached work-trees take turns using the > same directory as their work-tree, and more than one of them want to use > submodules, there will be conflicts about the '.gitmodules'

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > in process_entry(), and I think we could just there add a test for if > o_old,o_mod == a_oid,a_mode or something? Actually, not process_entry, but merge_content(). Oddly, that *already* has the check:

Re: [RFC 00/10] Make .the gitmodules file path configurable

Hi Antonio, On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Antonio Ospite wrote: > Hi, > > vcsh[1] uses bare git repositories and detached work-trees to manage > *distinct* sets of configuration files directly into $HOME. > > In general, submodules have worked perfectly fine with detached >

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > A bit of detour. "Change in side branch happened to be a subset of > the change in trunk and gets subsumed, but we end up writing the > same result" happens also with the simpler resolve strategy. > > Here is a fix.

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Thanks for a clear description of the issue. It does sound > interesting. I decided to show it with a simpler case that could be scripted and doesn't need the kernel. NOTE! This obviously doesn't happen for files

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

Junio C Hamano writes: > Linus Torvalds writes: > >> Now, the reason it was marked as changed is that the xfs branch _had_ >> in fact changed it, but the changes were already upstream and got >> merged away. But the file still got written out

[RFC 02/10] submodule: fix getting custom gitmodule file in fetch command

Import the default git configuration before accessing the gitmodules file. This is important when a value different from the default one is set via the 'core.submodulesfile' config. Signed-off-by: Antonio Ospite --- builtin/fetch.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1

[RFC 03/10] submodule: use the 'submodules_file' variable in output messages

The gitmodules file path can be customized by setting the 'core.submodulesFile' config option. Use the 'submodules_file' variable instead of the hardcoded '.gitmodules' in output messages, to reflect the actual path of the gitmodules file. NOTE: the default git configuration has to be

[RFC 00/10] Make .the gitmodules file path configurable

Hi, vcsh[1] uses bare git repositories and detached work-trees to manage *distinct* sets of configuration files directly into $HOME. In general, submodules have worked perfectly fine with detached work-trees for some time[2,3,4]. However when multiple repositories take turns using the same

[RFC 04/10] submodule: document 'core.submodulesFile' and fix references to '.gitmodules'

The gitmodules file location can be overridden by setting the 'core.submodulesFile' config option. Document this new option and reflect the new behavior in the documentation by using the more generic formula "gitmodules file" instead of the hardcoded '.gitmodules' file path. Signed-off-by:

[RFC 06/10] completion: add 'core.submodulesfile' to the git-completion.bash file

Signed-off-by: Antonio Ospite --- contrib/completion/git-completion.bash | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash index a75707394..19beb6735 100644 ---

[RFC 01/10] submodule: add 'core.submodulesFile' to override the '.gitmodules' path

When multiple repositories with detached work-trees take turns using the same directory as their work-tree, and more than one of them want to use submodules, there will be conflicts about the '.gitmodules' file. git hardcodes this path so it's not possible to override its location on a

[RFC 05/10] submodule: adjust references to '.gitmodules' in comments

In the comments refer to a more generic "gitmodules file" instead of using the '.gitmodules' file name directly. Signed-off-by: Antonio Ospite --- builtin/submodule--helper.c | 2 +- config.c| 7 +++ config.h| 7 +++

Re: [PATCH] specify encoding for sed command

I did a little more digging into this issue today. > On Apr 11, 2018, at 4:42 PM, Matt Coleman wrote: > > I found another (possibly better) way to fix this: > >> On Apr 10, 2018, at 3:18 AM, Matt Coleman wrote: >> >>> 1) What platform OS /

git blame completion add completion?

Hi, I use git blame sometimes to blame against specific revisions, i.e. "git blame -- " and it would be nice if blame could figure out how to complete the or revision reference.. I tried to take a stab at adding support for this, but I couldn't figure out which completion function to use... I

Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] rebase -i: offer to recreate commit topology

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Jake, > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Jacob Keller wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: >> > >> > Jacob Keller writes: >> >> On Wed,

Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] rebase -i: offer to recreate commit topology

Hi Jake, On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > > Jacob Keller writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Sergey Organov wrote: > >>> It was rather

Re: Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

Linus Torvalds writes: > Now, the reason it was marked as changed is that the xfs branch _had_ > in fact changed it, but the changes were already upstream and got > merged away. But the file still got written out (with the same > contents it had before the merge),

[PATCH 1/2] daemon: use timeout for uninterruptible poll

The poll provided in compat/poll.c is not interrupted by receiving SIGCHLD. Use a timeout for cleaning up dead children in a timely manner. Signed-off-by: Kim Gybels --- daemon.c | 10 -- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon.c

[PATCH 0/2] Fix early EOF with GfW daemon

It has been reported [1] that cloning from a Git-for-Windows daemon would sometimes fail with an early EOF error: $ git clone git://server/test Cloning into 'test'... remote: Counting objects: 36, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (24/24), done. fatal: read error: Invalid argument

[PATCH 2/2] daemon: graceful shutdown of client connection

On Windows, a connection is shutdown when the last open handle to it is closed. When that last open handle is stdout of our child process, an abortive shutdown is triggered when said process exits. Ensure a graceful shutdown of the client connection by keeping an open handle until we detect our

Re: File versioning based on shallow Git repositories?

On 12. april 2018 23:07, Rafael Ascensao wrote: Would initiating a repo with a empty root commit, tag it with 'base' then use $ git rebase --onto base master@{30 days ago} master; be viable? No... my question was confused from the beginning. With such large files I _shouldn't_ have history

Optimizing writes to unchanged files during merges?

So I just had an interesting experience that has happened before too, but this time I decided to try to figure out *why* it happened. I'm obviously in the latter part of the kernel merge window, and things are slowly calming down. I do the second XFS merge during this window, and it brings in

Re: File versioning based on shallow Git repositories?

Would initiating a repo with a empty root commit, tag it with 'base' then use $ git rebase --onto base master@{30 days ago} master; be viable? The --orphan & tag is perhaps more robust, since it's "harder" to move tags around. -- Rafael Ascensão

Re: File versioning based on shallow Git repositories?

On Thu, Apr 12 2018, Hallvard Breien Furuseth wrote: > On 12. april 2018 20:47, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> 1. Create a backup.git repo >> 2. Each time you make a backup, checkout a new orphan branch, see "git >> checkout --orphan" >> 3. You copy the files over, commit them, "git log"

Re: File versioning based on shallow Git repositories?

On 12. april 2018 20:47, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: 1. Create a backup.git repo 2. Each time you make a backup, checkout a new orphan branch, see "git checkout --orphan" 3. You copy the files over, commit them, "git log" at this point shows one commit no matter if you've done this

Re: fixup! [PATCH 1/6] doc: fix formatting inconsistency in githooks.txt

On 11 April 2018 at 23:08, Andreas Heiduk wrote: > - reflow some paragraphs > --- > Documentation/githooks.txt | 14 +++--- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) I have reviewed the resulting githooks.txt. See the diff below for two more instances that I

Re: File versioning based on shallow Git repositories?

On Thu, Apr 12 2018, Hallvard Breien Furuseth wrote: > Can I use a shallow Git repo for file versioning, and regularly purge > history older than e.g. 2 weeks? Purged data MUST NOT be recoverable. > > Or is there a backup tool based on shallow Git cloning which does this? > Push/pull to another

Re: [PATCH v6 15/15] rebase -i --rebase-merges: add a section to the man page

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:30 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> I think it would be worthwhile to point out that unlike the other commands >> this will not preserve untracked files. Maybe something like >> "Note that unlike the `pick` or `merge` commands or initial

File versioning based on shallow Git repositories?

Can I use a shallow Git repo for file versioning, and regularly purge history older than e.g. 2 weeks? Purged data MUST NOT be recoverable. Or is there a backup tool based on shallow Git cloning which does this? Push/pull to another shallow repo would be nice but is not required. The files are

Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] rebase -i: offer to recreate commit topology

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: > Hi Jacob, > > Jacob Keller writes: >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Sergey Organov wrote: >>> It was rather --recreate-merges just a few weeks ago, and I've seen >>>

Re: Great Investment Offer

Hello In my search for a business partner i got your contact in google search. My client is willing to invest $10 Million to $500 million but my client said he need a trusted partner who he can have a meeting at the point of releasing his funds. I told my client that you have a good profile

git gui issue

I'm having a bug with git gui. Please help me find the right place to report it. version stats: $ git gui version git-gui version 0.21.GITGUI $ git version git version 2.16.2 how the issue is produced: using Git Gui preferences Additional Diff Parameters set to

Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] rebase -i: offer to recreate commit topology

Hi Sergey, On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > >> The RFC v2 and Phillip's strategy are essentially the same, as has been > >> already shown multiple times, both theoretically

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Tiago, > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Tiago Botelho wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Christian Couder >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Harald Nordgren >>

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

Hi Tiago, On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Tiago Botelho wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Christian Couder > wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Harald Nordgren > > wrote: > >> I think it looks similar. But if I'm reading that thread

Re: [PATCH v6 15/15] rebase -i --rebase-merges: add a section to the man page

Johannes Schindelin writes: > + > +* Merge branch 'report-a-bug' > +|\ > +| * Add the feedback button > +* | Merge branch 'refactor-button' > +|\ \ > +| |/ > +| * Use the Button class for all buttons > +| * Extract a generic Button class from the

Re: [PATCHv3 00/15] replace_object.c: rename to use dash in file name

On 4/11/2018 8:21 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: v3: * interdiff below, the only changes are renaming the variable - struct ref_store *main_ref_store; + struct ref_store *refs; in struct repository. as well as dropping the file rename patch. * improved commit messages from

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

Hi Stefan, On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Harald Nordgren > wrote: > > When ran with '--merges-only', git bisect will only look at merge commits > > -- commits with 2 or more parents or the initial commit. > > There has

Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] commit-graph.txt: update future work

On 4/12/2018 5:12 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Derrick Stolee writes: +Here is a diagram to visualize the shape of the full commit graph, and +how different generation numbers relate: + ++-+ +| GENERATION_NUMBER_INFINITY =

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

Hi Harald, Thank you for working on this. On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Harald Nordgren wrote: > When ran with '--merges-only', git bisect will only look at merge > commits -- commits with 2 or more parents or the initial commit. This is an excellent idea! > Proof of concept of a feature that I

Re: [PATCH v6 14/15] rebase -i: introduce --rebase-merges=[no-]rebase-cousins

Johannes Schindelin writes: [...] > ++ > +By default, or when `no-rebase-cousins` was specified, commits which do not > +have `` as direct ancestor will keep their original branch point. sans quotes, <...> are used without them throughout the manual page. > +If

Re: [PATCH v8 03/14] commit-graph: add format document

On 4/11/2018 4:58 PM, Jakub Narebski wrote: Derrick Stolee writes: +CHUNK DATA: + + OID Fanout (ID: {'O', 'I', 'D', 'F'}) (256 * 4 bytes) + The ith entry, F[i], stores the number of OIDs with first + byte at most i. Thus F[255] stores the total + number of

Re: [PATCH v6 15/15] rebase -i --rebase-merges: add a section to the man page

Hi Phillip, On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 10/04/18 13:30, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Firstly let me say that I think expanding the documentation and having an > example is an excellent idea. Thanks! At first, I meant to leave this for others to contribute, but I think it

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Christian Couder wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Harald Nordgren > wrote: >> I think it looks similar. But if I'm reading that thread correctly >> then there was never a patch created, right? > > (It

Re: [PATCH v4] git{,-blame}.el: remove old bitrotting Emacs code

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: >> On the other hand, the 6-lines of e-lisp you wrote for git.el >> replacement is something the packagers could have written for their >> users, so (1) if we really want to go extra mile without trusting >> that distro packagers are less

Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] commit-graph.txt: update future work

Derrick Stolee writes: > +Here is a diagram to visualize the shape of the full commit graph, and > +how different generation numbers relate: > + > ++-+ > +| GENERATION_NUMBER_INFINITY = 0x | > +

Re: [PATCH v6 15/15] rebase -i --rebase-merges: add a section to the man page

Hi Eric & Phillip, On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:35 AM, Phillip Wood > wrote: > > On 10/04/18 13:30, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > >> +The `reset` command is essentially a `git reset --hard` to the specified > >> +revision

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Harald Nordgren wrote: > I think it looks similar. But if I'm reading that thread correctly > then there was never a patch created, right? (It is customary on this mailing list to reply after the sentences we reply to. We don't "top

Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] rebase -i: offer to recreate commit topology

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Sergey, > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> The RFC v2 and Phillip's strategy are essentially the same, as has been >> already shown multiple times, both theoretically and by testing. > > No, they are not.

Re: [PATCH] Create '--merges-only' option for 'git bisect'

I think it looks similar. But if I'm reading that thread correctly then there was never a patch created, right? On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Harald Nordgren > wrote: >> When ran with

Can i trust you?

Good Day, How are u doing today ? Apologies! I am a military woman ,seeking your kind assistance to move the sum of ($7M USD) to you, as far as i can be assured that my money will be safe in your care until i complete my service here in Afghanistan and come over next month. This is legitimate, and

Re: [PATCH v4] git{,-blame}.el: remove old bitrotting Emacs code

On Thu, Apr 12 2018, Junio C. Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > >> However, since downstream packagers such as Debian are packaging this >> as git-el it's less disruptive to still carry these files as Elisp >> code that'll error out with a message suggesting