On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:09 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Duy Nguyen writes:
>
>> Yes that's the intention. But after writing cover letter for v2 and
>> sending it out, it looks to me that this thing must stay until all our
>> code is converted to using the_hash_algo (I don't know if there are
>>
Duy Nguyen writes:
> Yes that's the intention. But after writing cover letter for v2 and
> sending it out, it looks to me that this thing must stay until all our
> code is converted to using the_hash_algo (I don't know if there are
> more to convert or it's finished already). So an alternative is
On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 5:29 AM, brian m. carlson
wrote:
>> @@ -40,5 +41,8 @@ int main(int argc, const char **argv)
>>
>> restore_sigpipe_to_default();
>>
>> + if (getenv("GIT_HASH_FIXUP"))
>> + repo_set_hash_algo(the_repository, GIT_HASH_SHA1);
>
> I'm lukewarm on adding thi
On 02/23, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 04:56:40PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> > diff --git a/builtin/index-pack.c b/builtin/index-pack.c
> > index 7e3e1a461c..8ee935504e 100644
> > --- a/builtin/index-pack.c
> > +++ b/builtin/index-pack.c
> > @@ -1673,6 +1673,11 @@ int
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 04:56:40PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> diff --git a/builtin/index-pack.c b/builtin/index-pack.c
> index 7e3e1a461c..8ee935504e 100644
> --- a/builtin/index-pack.c
> +++ b/builtin/index-pack.c
> @@ -1673,6 +1673,11 @@ int cmd_index_pack(int argc, const char **argv, c
Stefan Beller writes:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Stefan Beller writes:
>>
>>> I wonder if there is yet another missing case in the enumeration of
>>> the previous patch:
>>> Some commands are able to operate on GIT_OBJECT_DIR instead
>>> of GIT_DIR (git repack?
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> I wonder if there is yet another missing case in the enumeration of
>> the previous patch:
>> Some commands are able to operate on GIT_OBJECT_DIR instead
>> of GIT_DIR (git repack?), which may not even explore th
Stefan Beller writes:
> I wonder if there is yet another missing case in the enumeration of
> the previous patch:
> Some commands are able to operate on GIT_OBJECT_DIR instead
> of GIT_DIR (git repack?), which may not even explore the full git directory,
> and so doesn't know about the hash value
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> This reverts commit e26f7f19b6c7485f04234946a59ab8f4fd21d6d1. The root
> problem, git clone not setting up the_hash_algo, has been fixed in the
> previous patch.
>
> As a result of the revert, some code paths that use the_hash_algo
> w
This reverts commit e26f7f19b6c7485f04234946a59ab8f4fd21d6d1. The root
problem, git clone not setting up the_hash_algo, has been fixed in the
previous patch.
As a result of the revert, some code paths that use the_hash_algo
without initialization is revealed and fixed here. It's basically
commands
10 matches
Mail list logo