Re: [PATCH 1/8] xdl_change_compact(): rename some local variables for clarity

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:29AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > * ix -> i > * ixo -> io > * ixs -> start > * grpsiz -> groupsize After your change, I immediately understand three of them. But what is "io"? -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body

Re: [PATCH 2/8] xdl_change_compact(): clarify code

On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 04:50:46PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > I was not asking for undoing these, but giving short cryptic answers myself. > ;) > While I agree the variable names are way better than before, the use of while > instead of for (and then doing another final ++ after the loop)

Re: [PATCH v3] pager: move pager-specific setup into the build

Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 03:43:01AM +, Eric Wong wrote: > > > +PAGER_ENV_CQ = "$(subst ",\",$(subst \,\\,$(PAGER_ENV)))" > > +PAGER_ENV_CQ_SQ = $(subst ','\'',$(PAGER_ENV_CQ)) > > +BASIC_CFLAGS += -DPAGER_ENV='$(PAGER_ENV_CQ_SQ)' > > Here we set up CQ_SQ,

[PATCH v4] pager: move pager-specific setup into the build

Allowing PAGER_ENV to be set at build-time allows us to move pager-specific knowledge out of our build. This allows us to set a better default for FreeBSD more(1), which pretends not to understand ANSI color escapes if the MORE environment variable is left empty, but accepts the same variables as

Re: [PATCH v4 1/8] status: rename long-format print routines

On 08/03/2016 05:28 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler Hmm, are these physically the same people? If so, which one do you want to be known as? Yes, these are both my addresses. Still

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #01; Tue, 2)

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:03:39AM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: > > > > > * jk/push-force-with-lease-creation (2016-07-26) 3 commits > > - push: allow pushing new branches with --force-with-lease > > - push: add shorthand for --force-with-lease branch creation > > - Documentation/git-push: fix

Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] status: cleanup API to wt_status_print

On 08/03/2016 05:36 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Jeff Hostetler writes: From: Jeff Hostetler diff --git a/wt-status.h b/wt-status.h index 2023a3c..a859a12 100644 --- a/wt-status.h +++ b/wt-status.h @@ -43,6 +43,15 @@ struct wt_status_change_data

Re: [PATCH 5/8] xdl_change_compact(): fix compaction heuristic to adjust io

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:33AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > The code branch used for the compaction heuristic incorrectly forgot to > keep io in sync while the group was shifted. I think that could have > led to reading past the end of the rchgo array. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty

Re: [PATCH 3/8] xdl_change_compact(): rename i to end

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:31AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > Rename i to end, and alternate between using start and end as the > indexing variable as appropriate. > > Rename ixref to end_matching_other. > > Add some more comments. I'd usually complain that there is too much "what" in

Re: [PATCH v3 10/10] convert: add filter..process option

[Some of this answer might have been invalidated by v4; I might be away from computer for a few days, so I won't be reviewing] W dniu 03.08.2016 o 15:10, Lars Schneider pisze: > On 01 Aug 2016, at 00:19, Jakub Narębski wrote: >> W dniu 30.07.2016 o 01:38,

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:28AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > I've talked about this quite a bit on the list already. The idea is to > improve ugly diffs like > > @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { > } > > if (!$smtp_server) { > +

Re: [PATCH 8/8] diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:36AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > This table shows the number of diff slider groups that were positioned > differently than the human-generated values, for various repositories. > "default" is the default "git diff" algorithm. "compaction" is Git 2.9.0 > with the

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #01; Tue, 2)

> > * jk/push-force-with-lease-creation (2016-07-26) 3 commits > - push: allow pushing new branches with --force-with-lease > - push: add shorthand for --force-with-lease branch creation > - Documentation/git-push: fix placeholder formatting > > "git push --force-with-lease" already had enough

GIT by github 2.9.2 is listed on Software Informer

Good day! Software.informer.com would like to inform you that your product GIT by github 2.9.2 has been reviewed by our editors and your program got "100% Clean Award" http://git.software.informer.com/. We would be grateful if you place our award with a link to our review on your website. On

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #01; Tue, 2)

> On 04 Aug 2016, at 13:32, John Keeping wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:03:39AM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: >> >>> >>> * jk/push-force-with-lease-creation (2016-07-26) 3 commits >>> - push: allow pushing new branches with --force-with-lease >>> - push: add

Re: [[PATCH v2] 4/4] rebase: avoid computing unnecessary patch IDs

Hi Junio, On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > I do not think negative (or non-zero) return is an "abuse" at all. > > It is misleading in the context of the function whose name has "cmp" > > in it, but that is not the fault of this

Re: [PATCH] import-tars: support hard links

Hi Junio, On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > --- > > Published-As: > > https://github.com/dscho/git/releases/tag/import-tars-hardlink-v1 > > A link to a page that lets you download entire source tarball is not > very

Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

Hi Peff, On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > Leaving aside Dscho's questions of whether pulling patches from email is > > > convenient for most submitters (it certainly is for me, but I recognize > > > that it is not for

Problem with two copies of same branch diverging

Hi, Thanks for reading my question. I have two copies of code checked out at the same branch. Desktop and remote server. I use an IDE that automatically SFTP transfers each save from the desktop to the remote server, so I can run my changes on the server environment. At the end of the

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #01; Tue, 2)

Hi Lars & John, On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Lars Schneider wrote: > > On 04 Aug 2016, at 13:32, John Keeping wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:03:39AM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: > >> > >>> * jk/push-force-with-lease-creation (2016-07-26) 3 commits > >>> - push: allow

[PATCH] diff-highlight: Add comment for our assumption about --graph output.

--- contrib/diff-highlight/diff-highlight | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/contrib/diff-highlight/diff-highlight b/contrib/diff-highlight/diff-highlight index ec31356..9364423 100755 --- a/contrib/diff-highlight/diff-highlight +++ b/contrib/diff-highlight/diff-highlight @@

[PATCH] t5533: make it pass on case-sensitive filesystems

The newly-added test case wants to commit a file "c.t" (note the lower case) when a previous test case already committed a file "C.t". This confuses Git to the point that it thinks "c.t" was not staged when "git add c.t" was called. Simply make the naming of the test commits consistent with the

Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

Stefan Beller wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > I guess I have no really good idea yet, either, how to retain the ease of > > access of sending mails to the list, yet somehow keep a strong tie with > > the

Re: [PATCH 6/7] trace: disable key after write error

Jeff King writes: > If we get a write error writing to a trace descriptor, the > error isn't likely to go away if we keep writing. Instead, > you'll just get the same error over and over. E.g., try: > > GIT_TRACE_PACKET=42 git ls-remote >/dev/null > > You don't really need to

Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

Jeff King writes: > Like you, I have occasionally been bitten by Junio doing a fixup, and > then I end up re-rolling, and lose that fixup. ... which usually is caught when I receive the reroll, as I try to apply to the same base and compare the result with the previous round. >

What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with '-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with '+' are in 'next'. The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of the integration branches, but I am still holding onto them. Many topics in "Cooking" section

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 04:32:02PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Mike Hommey writes: > > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 03:28:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * mh/connect (2016-06-06) 10 commits > >> - connect: [host:port] is legacy for ssh > >> ... > >> - connect:

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

Am 04.08.2016 um 18:07 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: With GCC 6, the strdup() function is declared with the "nonnull" attribute, stating that it is not allowed to pass a NULL value as parameter. In nedmalloc()'s reimplementation of strdup(), Postel's Law is heeded and NULL parameters are handled

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 03:28:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * mh/connect (2016-06-06) 10 commits > - connect: [host:port] is legacy for ssh > - connect: move ssh command line preparation to a separate function > - connect: actively reject git:// urls with a user part > - connect: change

Re: storing cover letter of a patch series?

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 02:03:48PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Philip Oakley wrote: > > From: "Jacob Keller" > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Junio C Hamano > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>

[GSOC Update] Week 113

= SUMMARY === My public git.git is available here[1]. I regularly keep pushing my work so anyone interested can track me there. Feel free to participate in the discussions going on PRs with my mentors. Your comments are valuable. INTRODUCTION

Re: [BUG?] --boundary inconsistent with path limiting

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 03:40:43PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > That makes sense to me. We omit "c" because it doesn't touch "b.t", and > obviously include "b", which does. We _do_ include the boundary commit, > even though it doesn't touch the path, which makes sense to me. It > remains a boundary

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

René Scharfe writes: > This version of strdup() is only compiled if nedmalloc is used instead > of the system allocator. That means we can't rely on strdup() being > able to take NULL -- some (most?) platforms won't like it. Removing > the NULL check would be a more general and

Re: [PATCH 6/7] trace: disable key after write error

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 01:45:11PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > If we get a write error writing to a trace descriptor, the > > error isn't likely to go away if we keep writing. Instead, > > you'll just get the same error over and over. E.g., try: > > > >

Re: [PATCH 3/7] trace: use warning() for printing trace errors

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 01:41:02PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > Right now we just fprintf() straight to stderr, which can > > make the output hard to distinguish. It would be helpful to > > give it one of our usual prefixes like "error:", "warning:", > >

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

From: "Junio C Hamano" * po/range-doc (2016-07-20) 8 commits - doc: revisions - clarify reachability examples - doc: revisions - define `reachable` - doc: gitrevisions - clarify 'latter case' is revision walk - doc: gitrevisions - use 'reachable' in page description - doc:

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

Junio C Hamano wrote: > [Graduated to "master"] > * ew/http-walker (2016-07-18) 4 commits > (merged to 'next' on 2016-07-18 at a430a97) > + list: avoid incompatibility with *BSD sys/queue.h > (merged to 'next' on 2016-07-13 at 8585c03) > + http-walker: reduce O(n) ops

Re: [BUG?] --boundary inconsistent with path limiting

Jeff King writes: > But now if I limit to "a.t", I get no output at all: > > $ git log --format='%m %s' --boundary a..c -- a.t > > whereas I would have expected "- a" to show the boundary. > > Is this a bug, or are my expectations wrong? In a range a..c, there is nothing that

Re: [PATCH 3/7] trace: use warning() for printing trace errors

Jeff King writes: > Right now we just fprintf() straight to stderr, which can > make the output hard to distinguish. It would be helpful to > give it one of our usual prefixes like "error:", "warning:", > etc. > > It doesn't make sense to use error() here, as the trace code > is

Re: [PATCH 4/7] trace: cosmetic fixes for error messages

Jeff King writes: > I think it would be nicer to still to print: > > warning: first line > warning: second line > > etc. We do that for "advice:", but not the rest of the vreportf > functions. It might be nice to do that, but we'd have to go back to > printing into a buffer

Re: [ANNOUNCE] git-series: track changes to a patch series over time

On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 08:12:02PM +0100, Richard Ipsum wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:40:55PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > I'd welcome any feedback, whether on the interface and workflow, the > > internals and collaboration, ideas on presenting diffs of patch series, > > or anything else.

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

"Philip Oakley" writes: >> Updates in 4/8 ("give headings") is reported to break formatting? >> cf. <57913c97.1030...@xiplink.com> > > Just to say I haven't forgotten. OK. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #02; Thu, 4)

Mike Hommey writes: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 03:28:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> * mh/connect (2016-06-06) 10 commits >> - connect: [host:port] is legacy for ssh >> ... >> - connect: document why we sometimes call get_port after get_host_and_port >> >> Rewrite

Re: [PATCH 3/7] trace: use warning() for printing trace errors

Jeff King writes: > I wondered if that would then let us drop set_warn_routine(), but it > looks like there are other warning() calls it cares about. So that would > invalidate the last paragraph here, though I still think converting the > trace errors to warning() is a reasonable

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

Let's try it this way. How about this as a replacement? -- >8 -- From: Johannes Schindelin Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 18:07:08 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning With GCC 6, the strdup() function is declared with the "nonnull"

Re: git bisect for reachable commits only

On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Oleg Taranenko writes: > >> First, assuming the common ancestor is GOOD based on the fact that >> some descendant given as GOOD is pretty bad idea. > > What you claim is fundamentally

Re: storing cover letter of a patch series?

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:39:49AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > The problem with "empty commit trick" is that it is a commit whose > sole purpose is to describe the series, and its presence makes it > clear where the series ends, but the topology does not tell where > the series begins, so it is

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

Am 05.08.2016 um 07:36 schrieb Johannes Sixt: Am 05.08.2016 um 00:39 schrieb Junio C Hamano: @@ -955,12 +955,10 @@ void **nedpindependent_comalloc(nedpool *p, size_t elems, size_t *sizes, void ** */ char *strdup(const char *s1) { -char *s2 = 0; -if (s1) { -size_t len =

Re: git grep -P is multiline for negative lookahead/behind

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Michael Giuffrida wrote: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> I do not think "git grep" was designed to do multi-line anything, >> with or without lookahead. If you imagine that the implementation

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

Am 05.08.2016 um 00:39 schrieb Junio C Hamano: @@ -955,12 +955,10 @@ void **nedpindependent_comalloc(nedpool *p, size_t elems, size_t *sizes, void ** */ char *strdup(const char *s1) { - char *s2 = 0; - if (s1) { - size_t len = strlen(s1) + 1; - s2 =

Re: [PATCH v3] pager: move pager-specific setup into the build

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 11:34:10AM +, Eric Wong wrote: > > > --- a/config.mak.uname > > > +++ b/config.mak.uname > > > @@ -209,6 +209,7 @@ ifeq ($(uname_S),FreeBSD) > > > HAVE_PATHS_H = YesPlease > > > GMTIME_UNRELIABLE_ERRORS = UnfortunatelyYes > > > HAVE_BSD_SYSCTL = YesPlease > > > +

[PATCH 0/6] git clone: Marry --recursive and --reference

Currently when cloning a superproject with --recursive and --reference only the superproject learns about its alternates. The submodules are cloned independently, which may incur lots of network costs. Assume that the reference repository has the submodules at the same paths as the

Re: [PATCH] t5533: make it pass on case-sensitive filesystems

Johannes Schindelin writes: > The newly-added test case wants to commit a file "c.t" (note the lower > case) when a previous test case already committed a file "C.t". This > confuses Git to the point that it thinks "c.t" was not staged when "git > add c.t" was called.

Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 05:29:52PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > So my idea was to introduce a new --reword= option to `git commit` > that would commit an empty patch and let the user edit the commit message, > later replacing the original one with the new one. This is not *quite* as > nice

Re: Problem with two copies of same branch diverging

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Ed Greenberg wrote: > On 08/04/2016 01:28 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> ... indicates that you are not pushing to update the remote >> repository correctly. Once you get that part working correctly, >> after you push at the end of the

Re: [PATCH v6 16/16] merge-recursive: flush output buffer even when erroring out

Johannes Schindelin writes: > Ever since 66a155b (Enable output buffering in merge-recursive., > 2007-01-14), we had a problem: When the merge failed in a fatal way, all > regular output was swallowed because we called die() and did not get a > chance to drain the

Re: git grep -P is multiline for negative lookahead/behind

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Michael Giuffrida writes: > >> Is this expected behavior, and if so, why/where is this documented? > > I do not think "git grep" was designed to do multi-line anything, > with or without lookahead.

Re: [PATCH 8/8] diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs

Michael Haggerty writes: >>> + } >>> + /* >>> +* We have reached the end of the line without finding any non-space >>> +* characters; i.e., the whole line consists of trailing spaces, >>> which we >>> +* are not interested in. >>> +

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

Jeff King writes: > Not that you probably need more random cases of C code, but I happened > to be looking at a diff in git.git today, b333d0d6, which is another > regression for the compaction heuristic. Wow, that one is _really_ bad. Does it have something to do with the

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Better heuristics make prettier diffs

On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:54:51PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > Not that you probably need more random cases of C code, but I happened > > to be looking at a diff in git.git today, b333d0d6, which is another > > regression for the compaction heuristic. >

Re: Problem with two copies of same branch diverging

Ed Greenberg writes: > Hi, Thanks for reading my question. > > I have two copies of code checked out at the same branch. Desktop and > remote server. > > I use an IDE that automatically SFTP transfers each save from the > desktop to the remote server, so I can run my changes

Re: [PATCH 6/8] xdl_change_compact(): keep track of the earliest end

Michael Haggerty writes: > This makes it easier to detect whether shifting is possible, and will > also make the next change easier. I can see the code keeping track of earliest_end but the above does not make it clear what the new "continue" is about. ... easier to

Re: [PATCH 7/8] is_blank_line: take a single xrecord_t as argument

Michael Haggerty writes: > There is no reason for it to take an array and index as argument, as it > only accesses a single element of the array. Yup, I think I am partly guilty. The result looks much nicer. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH 1/8] xdl_change_compact(): rename some local variables for clarity

Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:29AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > >> * ix -> i >> * ixo -> io >> * ixs -> start >> * grpsiz -> groupsize > > After your change, I immediately understand three of them. But what is > "io"? I had the same reaction. -- To

Re: [PATCH 8/8] diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs

Michael Haggerty writes: I agree with Peff about "comment on the voodoo upfront". > +#define START_OF_FILE_BONUS 9 > +#define END_OF_FILE_BONUS 46 > +#define TOTAL_BLANK_WEIGHT 4 > +#define PRE_BLANK_WEIGHT 16 > +#define RELATIVE_INDENT_BONUS -1 > +#define

Re: [PATCH 5/8] xdl_change_compact(): fix compaction heuristic to adjust io

Michael Haggerty writes: > The code branch used for the compaction heuristic incorrectly forgot to > keep io in sync while the group was shifted. I think that could have > led to reading past the end of the rchgo array. I had to read the first sentence three times as

[BUG?] --boundary inconsistent with path limiting

Let's say I have a simple repo with three paths: git init -q repo cd repo for i in a b c do echo content >$i.t git add $i.t git commit -qm $i && git tag $i done If I ask for the top 2 commits,

Re: [PATCH 8/8] diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs

Stefan Beller writes: > I have just reread the scoring function and I think you could pull out the > `score=indent` assignment (it is always assigned except for indent <0) > > if (indent == -1) >score = 0; > else >score =

Re: [PATCH v6 08/16] merge-recursive: allow write_tree_from_memory() to error out

Johannes Schindelin writes: > It is possible that a tree cannot be written (think: disk full). We > will want to give the caller a chance to clean up instead of letting > the program die() in such a case. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin

Re: [PATCH v6 15/16] Ensure that the output buffer is released after calling merge_trees()

Johannes Schindelin writes: > The recursive merge machinery accumulates its output in an output > buffer, to be flushed at the end of merge_recursive(). At this point, > we forgot to release the output buffer. > ... > diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c

Re: [PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

Johannes Schindelin writes: > With GCC 6, the strdup() function is declared with the "nonnull" > attribute, stating that it is not allowed to pass a NULL value as > parameter. > > In nedmalloc()'s reimplementation of strdup(), Postel's Law is heeded > and NULL

Re: [PATCH v6 07/16] merge-recursive: avoid returning a wholesale struct

Johannes Schindelin writes: > It is technically allowed, as per C89, for functions' return type to > be complete structs (i.e. *not* just pointers to structs). > > However, it was just an oversight of this developer when converting > Python code to C code in 6d297f8

[PATCH 1/6] t7408: modernize style

No functional change intended. This commit only changes formatting to the style we recently use, e.g. starting the body of a test with a single quote on the same line as the header, and then having the test indented in the following lines. Whenever we change directories, we do that in subshells.

[PATCH 2/6] t7408: merge short tests, factor out testing method

Tests consisting of one line each can be consolidated to have fewer tests to run as well as fewer lines of code. When having just a few git commands, do not create a new shell but use the -C flag in Git to execute in the correct directory. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller ---

[PATCH 3/6] submodule--helper module-clone: allow multiple references

Allow users to pass in multiple references, just as clone accepts multiple references as well. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller --- builtin/submodule--helper.c | 19 +++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/submodule--helper.c

[PATCH 5/6] submodule update: add super-reference flag

Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller --- builtin/submodule--helper.c | 14 +- git-submodule.sh| 10 ++ 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/builtin/submodule--helper.c b/builtin/submodule--helper.c index b6f297b..707f201

[PATCH 4/6] submodule--helper update-clone: allow multiple references

Allow the user to pass in multiple references to update_clone. Currently this is only internal API, but once the shell script is replaced by a C version, this is needed. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller --- builtin/submodule--helper.c | 14 +- git-submodule.sh

[PATCH 6/6] clone: reference flag is used for submodules as well

When giving a --reference while also giving --recurse, the alternates for the submodules are assumed to be in the superproject as well. In case they are not, we error out when cloning the submodule. However the update command succeeds as usual (with no alternates). Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller

Re: [RFC/PATCH v11 04/13] bisect--helper: `bisect_clean_state` shell function in C

Pranit Bauva writes: >> Also you do not seem to check the error from the function to smudge >> the "result" you are returning from this function. > > Yes I should combine the results from every removal. > >> Isn't unlink_or_warn() more correct helper to use here? > > The

Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

Hi Stefan, On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:59 AM, Johannes Schindelin > >> wrote:

[PATCH 0/2] Patches to let Git build with GCC 6 and DEVELOPER=SureWhyNot

While working on some local setup to allow my poor little laptop to build and test the Windows-specific patches of Git for Windows on top of the upstream branches, my development environment updated to use GCC 6, and these patches were required. Johannes Schindelin (2): nedmalloc: fix

[PATCH 1/2] nedmalloc: fix misleading indentation

Some code in nedmalloc is indented in a funny way that could be misinterpreted as if a line after a for loop was included in the loop body, when it is not. GCC 6 complains about this in DEVELOPER=YepSure mode. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin ---

Re: [RFC/PATCH v11 04/13] bisect--helper: `bisect_clean_state` shell function in C

Hey Junio, On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Pranit Bauva writes: > >>> Also you do not seem to check the error from the function to smudge >>> the "result" you are returning from this function. >> >> Yes I should combine the

[PATCH 2/2] nedmalloc: work around overzealous GCC 6 warning

With GCC 6, the strdup() function is declared with the "nonnull" attribute, stating that it is not allowed to pass a NULL value as parameter. In nedmalloc()'s reimplementation of strdup(), Postel's Law is heeded and NULL parameters are handled gracefully. GCC 6 complains about that now because it

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2016, #01; Tue, 2)

Johannes Schindelin writes: >> > Something like this will make the test more consistent with the rest of >> > the file: >> > >> > diff --git a/t/t5533-push-cas.sh b/t/t5533-push-cas.sh >> > index 5f29664..e5bbbd8 100755 >> > --- a/t/t5533-push-cas.sh >> > +++

Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] pkt-line: extract set_packet_header()

Jeff King writes: > The cost of write() may vary on other platforms, but the cost of memcpy > generally shouldn't. So I'm inclined to say that it is not really worth > micro-optimizing the interface. > > I think the other issue is that format_packet() only lets you send > string

Re: [RFC/PATCH v11 03/13] bisect--helper: `write_terms` shell function in C

Pranit Bauva writes: >>> + res = fprintf(fp, "%s\n%s\n", bad, good); >>> + res |= fclose(fp); >>> + return (res < 0) ? -1 : 0; >>> +} >> >> If fprintf(3) were a function that returns 0 on success and negative >> on error (like fclose(3) is), the pattern to

Re: [PATCH v3] t7063: work around FreeBSD's lazy mtime update feature

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:07 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> If you mean to tell the user "I won't describe it in detail, if you >> really want to know, >> go run blame yourself", spell it out like so. I was hoping that you >> can

Re: [RFC/PATCH] rebase--interactive: Add "sign" command

Jeff King writes: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 09:08:48AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > However, I could imagine that we actually want this to be more extensible. >> > After all, all you are doing is to introduce a new rebase -i command that >> > does nothing else than shelling

Re: [PATCH v4 03/12] pkt-line: add packet_flush_gentle()

Jeff King writes: > 2. It calls check_pipe(), which will turn EPIPE into death-by-SIGPIPE > (in case you had for some reason ignored SIGPIPE). > ... > > Thinking about (2), I'd go so far as to say that the trace actually > should just be using: > > if (write_in_full(...)

Re: obsolete index in wt_status_print after pre-commit hook runs

Andrew Keller writes: > In summary, I think I prefer #2 from a usability point of view, however I’m > having > trouble proving that #1 is actually *bad* and should be disallowed. Yeah, I agree with your argument from the usability and safety point of view. > Any

Re: patch submission process, was Re: [PATCH v6 06/16] merge_recursive: abort properly upon errors

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > >> If we were to change our workflows drastically, I'd propose to >> go a way[1] similar to notedb in Gerrit, or git-series, > > Gerrit is a huge, non-distributed system. Complex, too. If we change the >

Re: [RFC/PATCH v11 04/13] bisect--helper: `bisect_clean_state` shell function in C

Pranit Bauva writes: > Hey Junio, > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Pranit Bauva writes: >> Also you do not seem to check the error from the function to smudge the "result" you are returning

Re: [PATCH 8/8] diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 12:56 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:36AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > >> This table shows the number of diff slider groups that were positioned >> differently than the human-generated values, for various repositories. >> "default"

Re: [RFC/PATCH v11 04/13] bisect--helper: `bisect_clean_state` shell function in C

Hey Junio, On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Pranit Bauva writes: > >> Hey Junio, >> >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Pranit Bauva writes: >>> > Also