From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2009, #06; Sat, 24) Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:51:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20090125185150.GA12727@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <7v8wp0kmj4.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jan 25 19:53:19 2009 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 1LRA6f-0004A1-6b for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:53:17 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750912AbZAYSvx (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:51:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750855AbZAYSvx (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:51:53 -0500 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:33722 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750776AbZAYSvw (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:51:52 -0500 Received: (qmail 27223 invoked by uid 107); 25 Jan 2009 18:52:00 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:52:00 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 25 Jan 2009 13:51:50 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 01:17:33PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > BTW a test run on my machine resulted in a few koku of valgrind errors; > This was done in my personal tree which contains dozens of extra patches, > so I want to repeat the exercize with 'next' first, but I think we will > get quite some patches due to the valgrind support... Hmm. I hope not. "master" was testing clean on valgrind a few months ago (and took only a handful of cleanups to get that way after years of development), so either you are getting false positives, my original work was getting false negatives, or the code quality has dropped dramatically in the last 3 months. :) -Peff