From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Couder Subject: Re: git-bisect annoyances Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:56:59 +0200 Message-ID: <200804120856.59290.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> References: <20080409101428.GA2637@elte.hu> <200804110741.40732.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <20080411114104.GE9205@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Carl Worth , Junio C Hamano To: Ingo Molnar X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 12 08:52:34 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JkZbD-000399-La for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:52:32 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753622AbYDLGvk convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:51:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753534AbYDLGvk (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:51:40 -0400 Received: from smtp1-g19.free.fr ([212.27.42.27]:37620 "EHLO smtp1-g19.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753514AbYDLGvj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:51:39 -0400 Received: from smtp1-g19.free.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 161611AB2BC; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:51:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bureau.boubyland (gre92-7-82-243-130-161.fbx.proxad.net [82.243.130.161]) by smtp1-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF071AB2E8; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:51:37 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 In-Reply-To: <20080411114104.GE9205@elte.hu> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Le vendredi 11 avril 2008, Ingo Molnar a =E9crit : > * Christian Couder wrote: > > > # > > > # So perhaps this new, unnamed branch is what is causing the > > > trouble? # Lets try a specific branch then: > > > # > > > > > > dione:~/linux-tmp4> git-checkout master > > > Previous HEAD position was 4991408... Linux 2.6.24 > > > Switched to branch "master" > > > > > > dione:~/linux-tmp4> git-bisect start > > > won't bisect on seeked tree > > > > This seems to work for me with git 1.5.5 on the git tree: > > > > What git version do you have ? > > git-core-1.5.4.3-2.fc8, like for the previous report. > > and it worked for me too in a later tree - so the condition seems > transient. Yes, it probably depends on what you have done before. I didn't look at it yet, but I will have a look soon. Anyway as Junio said, there have been some improvements in 1.5.5 so it = might=20 be a good idea to upgrade. > > > dione:~/linux-tmp4> git-bisect good v2.6.24 bad HEAD > > > dione:~/linux-tmp4> > > > > This is really bad, because, as you can see from the man page or "g= it > > bisect -h" (see also the patch I just sent), "git bisect good" can > > take many known good revisions: > > > > git bisect good [...] > > mark ... known-good revisions. > > > > So you marked also "bad" and HEAD as "good". > > > > This is really strange, because here I get for example: > > > > $ git-bisect good bad HEAD > > Bad rev input: bad HEAD > > > > So you must have something tagged as "bad" or have a "bad" branch, = and > > that's why the command works for you but does the wrong thing. > > no, there are no 'bad' braches or revisions. You are right, we have got some bugs here I think. In my case bad and HEAD were neither proper revs, that's why I got an e= rror. But I realized that as long as there is one proper rev in what you give= =20 to "git bisect good" it will ignore bad revs and mark as good the prope= r=20 rev you gave it. I just sent a patch to fix this, but I am not sure it's the right fix. More work is probably needed. Ooops I just spotted one bug in my patch. Please wait, I will send another one. > and ... if "git-bisect good X bad Y" is invalid syntax it should be > detected by the tool ...=20 Yes. Thanks again, Christian.