From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5CA201A7 for ; Sat, 20 May 2017 23:21:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751830AbdETXVj (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2017 19:21:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:35242 "EHLO mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751367AbdETXVi (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2017 19:21:38 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f65.google.com with SMTP id i63so13517566pgd.2 for ; Sat, 20 May 2017 16:21:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=2xQLOkEQ9S8wBNqx0utv90MK1/xunYxtLbsQu269uWs=; b=erm1G8ezl1dFg5VvZAgf5jgFPbO7Y9oOIaHNATbTOW6AEb8FGLrZjAp5sOPpMshXU7 mcX+iuiQb/NaCTFHINswXYX+6+WzbuRLLgGCdlRNsloSTRV5Ps4N9BTIzmCsL+YCpYPe /LHV3uEorPbGStceNqiX5RlXHjESUegrEoO9JZlNrCvvWClJH/am7NtWN6ZQPikp5+eI Zcc9m7FfXNAzx94j5sJV9iZnAfUC25Xpz+VkwX8BTHsCpXjY3CmHQwUpkWilWrXLNFmT ibDxr4BSHQf1o4OoO2CTFQu//JdOy6txEDZZV+rOlTavu6E703WQk4EYSivyMWVyHVk/ 1M9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=2xQLOkEQ9S8wBNqx0utv90MK1/xunYxtLbsQu269uWs=; b=IQIrtPtaA2D7j/yi8JT2e/TwFywMn6r8GiIQ6s2ey55mfbvJEvkrR4Xv6twRWJTgP4 BZCtS385ZkGvJBpcnhqjC0yaDusF9xy4fuNZ+PuPPhBoj2WtAm0bfLEtvi0RtekzWoyY iTBYv6lhm4BDCHfFF0lgnE2wqfrRLOvqQymL9/yo//N/coqHdevhA9TWtzOlMnBK+gjW Yk5PhWNzAxrJC6FLGdctYSiC+00Ix4rL9prDSsNRwUd/tp3BGYyDYGTGDIWJmaVG3y/q AycCFfLq5hBhc2Wi94P8r/rS7lwJMoXMfUDh8WYidJF1Yo+fXsrcVE3+s6Bc07hiF/Zj 9ULQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDri6jbw7e6RgB794+FON7ihq0CfmPMQ/u0OLkUTCaWVYnXvInp iZvrnHkww2iM/Q== X-Received: by 10.98.224.136 with SMTP id d8mr18108674pfm.140.1495322497519; Sat, 20 May 2017 16:21:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:8622:4027:806a:d2b9:807c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l7sm34541696pgn.10.2017.05.20.16.21.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 20 May 2017 16:21:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Ramsay Jones Cc: Eric Wong , Michael J Gruber , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] name-rev: use larger timestamp for is_better_name References: <20170520203649.GA13079@untitled> Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 08:21:35 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Ramsay Jones's message of "Sat, 20 May 2017 22:16:10 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ramsay Jones writes: > I test on 32-bit Linux from time to time, and tonight's 'pu' > branch fails t4202.44, t6007.2,5-6,12-13,16, t6012.2-11, > t6111.2-65. I bisected the t4202 failure to a merge commit > (99d31e1378, merge branch 'jc/name-rev-lw-tag') and I spotted > the 'unsigned long' taggerdate parameter to the is_better_name() > function. Thanks. My earlier "oh, cutoff that was long also is a timestamp" patch was what I did while making this exact "evil merge" change, and then when I re-integrated everything, I forgot about it. I'll teach my rerere database about this. Thanks.