Duy Nguyen writes:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>> Hmm. That is not too bad, but somehow it feels funny to me to be
>> polluting each test script with these annotations. And to be driving it
>> from inside the test scripts.
>>
>> It seems like:
>>
>> make SANITIZE=leak
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> Hmm. That is not too bad, but somehow it feels funny to me to be
> polluting each test script with these annotations. And to be driving it
> from inside the test scripts.
>
> It seems like:
>
> make SANITIZE=leak test GIT_SKIP_TESTS="$(cat kno
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 07:27:58AM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > Makes sense to try to make sure that we don't regress leak-free tests. I
> > don't know what our Travis-budget looks like, but I would volunteer to
> > run something like this periodically using my own cycles.
> >
> > My experience w
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:15:06PM +0100, Martin Ågren wrote:
> On 12 February 2018 at 10:56, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:05 AM, Martin Ågren wrote:
> >> On 6 February 2018 at 03:13, Jeff King wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 08:28:10PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> I le
On 12 February 2018 at 10:56, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:05 AM, Martin Ågren wrote:
>> On 6 February 2018 at 03:13, Jeff King wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 08:28:10PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
I learned SANITIZE=leak today! It not only catches this but also "dst".
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 3:05 AM, Martin Ågren wrote:
> On 6 February 2018 at 03:13, Jeff King wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 08:28:10PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>>> I learned SANITIZE=leak today! It not only catches this but also "dst".
>>>
>>> Jeff is there any ongoing effort to make the test
On 6 February 2018 at 03:13, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 08:28:10PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>> I learned SANITIZE=leak today! It not only catches this but also "dst".
>>
>> Jeff is there any ongoing effort to make the test suite pass with
>> SANITIZE=leak? My t2038 passed, so I wen
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 08:28:10PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> >> This is still leaking 'worktrees'[1]. You probably want
> >> free_worktrees() immediately after the find_worktree() invocation.
> >
> > Sorry, free_worktrees() after the last use of 'wt' since you still
> > need to access its fields,
On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:23 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:53 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
>> wrote:
>>> +static int move_worktree(int ac, const char **av, const char *prefix)
>>> +{
>>> + [...]
>>> + worktree
On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 4:15 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:53 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
> wrote:
>> +static int move_worktree(int ac, const char **av, const char *prefix)
>> +{
>> + [...]
>> + worktrees = get_worktrees(0);
>> + wt = find_worktree(worktrees,
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:53 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> This command allows to relocate linked worktrees. Main worktree cannot
> (yet) be moved.
> [...]
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
> ---
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-worktree.txt b/Documentation/git-worktree.txt
> @@ -79,6 +80
11 matches
Mail list logo
