On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> Fair enough. If you pull from
>
> rsync://www.parisc-linux.org/~jejb/scsi-misc-2.6.git
Thanks. Pulled and pushed out.
> Doing this exposed two bugs in your merge script:
>
> 1) It doesn't like a completely new directory (the misc tree contains
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:29 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 2.6.12 is some time away, if for no other reason than the fact that this
> SCM thing has obviously eaten two weeks of my time. So I'd be inclined to
> chalk this up as a "learning experience" with git, and just go forward.
Fair enough.
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 19:16 -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> Yes, that's what I did to get back to the commit just before the
> merge:
>
> fsck-cache --unreachable 54ff646c589dcc35182d01c5b557806759301aa3|awk
> '/^unreachable /{print $2}'|sed 's:^\(..\):.git/objects/\1/:'|xargs rm
I was actually d
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> Then the git-pull... script actually does the merge and the resulting
> tree checks out against BK
So?
What do you intend to do with all the other stuff I've already put on top?
Yes, I can undo my tree, but my tree has had more stuff in it since
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 10:10 +1000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:03 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Git does work like BK in the way that you cannot remove history when you
> > have distributed it. Once it's there, it's there.
>
> But older history can be pruned, and there's r
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:03 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The patches from you I have in my tree are:
>
> scsi: add DID_REQUEUE to the error handling
> zfcp: add point-2-point support
> [PATCH] Convert i2o to compat_ioctl
> [PATCH] kill old EH constants
> [PATCH] scs
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:03 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Git does work like BK in the way that you cannot remove history when you
> have distributed it. Once it's there, it's there.
But older history can be pruned, and there's really no reason why an
http-based 'git pull' couldn't simply refrain
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> It looks like the merge tree has contamination from the scsi-misc-2.6
> tree ... possibly because the hosting system got the merged objects when
> I pushed.
Nope, the way I merge, if I get a few objects it shouldn't matter at all.
I'll just look
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 01:23:24AM CEST, I got a letter
where Junio C Hamano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> However the "Getting object database" part trashed this symlink
> when I tried to pull from my other repo locally. I am wondering
> it the following might be a better alte
> "LT" == Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LT> Merged. Here's the command line history:
LT> ~/git/git-pull-script \
LT>rsync://www.parisc-linux.org/~jejb/scsi-rc-fixes-2.6.git
Maybe it is just me, but I have this setup:
$ /bin/ls -lF .git
total 20
-rw-rw-r-
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 14:39 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Linus, the rc-fixes repo is ready for applying ... it's the same one I
> > announced on linux-scsi and lkml a while ago just with the git date
> > information updated to be correct (the misc one should wait until after
> > 2.6.12 is final
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> As of today, I have two SCSI git trees operational:
>
> rsync://www.parisc-linux.org/~jejb/scsi-rc-fixes-2.6.git
Merged. Here's the command line history:
~/git/git-pull-script
rsync://www.parisc-linux.org/~jejb/scsi-rc-fixes-2.6.git
12 matches
Mail list logo
