* git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 @ 2014-07-28 9:42 Bryan Turner 2014-07-28 10:18 ` Ramsay Jones 2014-07-28 10:35 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Bryan Turner @ 2014-07-28 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Git Users Using git diff-tree --stdin on 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 produces incorrect commit messages. Here's an example to reproduce the issue: bturner@ubuntu:/tmp$ git init --bare test.git Initialized empty Git repository in /tmp/test.git/ bturner@ubuntu:/tmp$ git clone test.git Cloning into 'test'... warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository. done. bturner@ubuntu:/tmp$ cd test bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ echo "Hello" > file.txt bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git add file.txt bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git commit -m "Initial commit" [master (root-commit) c5e16f3] Initial commit 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) create mode 100644 file.txt bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ echo "World" >> file.txt bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git commit -am "Second commit" [master 9214ac7] Second commit 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git push origin HEAD Counting objects: 6, done. Delta compression using up to 4 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (2/2), done. Writing objects: 100% (6/6), 446 bytes | 0 bytes/s, done. Total 6 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0) To /tmp/test.git * [new branch] HEAD -> master bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ cd ../test.git/ bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ git rev-list -1 --format="%H|%h|%P|%p|%aN|%aE|%at%n%B%n" 9214ac7 commit 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|9214ac7|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|c5e16f3|Bryan Turner|bturner@atlassian.com|1406539558 Second commit bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ /opt/git/2.0.3/bin/git diff-tree --no-renames --always --format="commit %H%n%H|%h|%P|%p|%aN|%aE|%at|%B%n" --root 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d commit 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|Bryan Turner|bturner@atlassian.com|1406539558|Second commit :100644 100644 e965047ad7c57865823c7d992b1d046ea66edf78 f9264f7fbd31ae7a18b7931ed8946fb0aebb0af3 M file.txt bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ /opt/git/2.0.3/bin/git diff-tree --no-renames --always --format="commit %H%n%H|%h|%P|%p|%aN|%aE|%at|%B%n" --root --stdin --9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d commit 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|Bryan Turner|bturner@atlassian.com|1406539543|Initial commit :100644 100644 e965047ad7c57865823c7d992b1d046ea66edf78 f9264f7fbd31ae7a18b7931ed8946fb0aebb0af3 M file.txt bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ Running a git bisect between v2.0.1, which does not manifest this issue, and v2.0.2 fingers the following commit: bturner@ubuntu:~/Development/oss/git/git$ git bisect bad c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 is the first bad commit commit c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 Author: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Date: Tue Jun 10 17:43:02 2014 -0400 commit: convert commit->buffer to a slab Bryan Turner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 9:42 git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 Bryan Turner @ 2014-07-28 10:18 ` Ramsay Jones 2014-07-28 10:35 ` Jeff King 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ramsay Jones @ 2014-07-28 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Turner, Git Users On 28/07/14 10:42, Bryan Turner wrote: > Using git diff-tree --stdin on 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 produces incorrect > commit messages. > > Here's an example to reproduce the issue: > > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp$ git init --bare test.git > Initialized empty Git repository in /tmp/test.git/ > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp$ git clone test.git > Cloning into 'test'... > warning: You appear to have cloned an empty repository. > done. > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp$ cd test > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ echo "Hello" > file.txt > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git add file.txt > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git commit -m "Initial commit" > [master (root-commit) c5e16f3] Initial commit > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > create mode 100644 file.txt > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ echo "World" >> file.txt > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git commit -am "Second commit" > [master 9214ac7] Second commit > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ git push origin HEAD > Counting objects: 6, done. > Delta compression using up to 4 threads. > Compressing objects: 100% (2/2), done. > Writing objects: 100% (6/6), 446 bytes | 0 bytes/s, done. > Total 6 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0) > To /tmp/test.git > * [new branch] HEAD -> master > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test$ cd ../test.git/ > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ git rev-list -1 > --format="%H|%h|%P|%p|%aN|%aE|%at%n%B%n" 9214ac7 > commit 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d > 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|9214ac7|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|c5e16f3|Bryan > Turner|bturner@atlassian.com|1406539558 > Second commit > > > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ /opt/git/2.0.3/bin/git diff-tree ----------------------------------------^^^^^^^ You appear to have used v2.0.3 on both invocations of diff-tree (see also below); cut-n-paste error? > --no-renames --always --format="commit > %H%n%H|%h|%P|%p|%aN|%aE|%at|%B%n" --root > 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d > commit 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d > 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|Bryan > Turner|bturner@atlassian.com|1406539558|Second commit > > > > :100644 100644 e965047ad7c57865823c7d992b1d046ea66edf78 > f9264f7fbd31ae7a18b7931ed8946fb0aebb0af3 M file.txt > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ /opt/git/2.0.3/bin/git diff-tree > --no-renames --always --format="commit > %H%n%H|%h|%P|%p|%aN|%aE|%at|%B%n" --root --stdin > --9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d > commit 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d > 9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|9214ac79728424a971244c34432c6d948754198d|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|c5e16f37164f1b7411685def64d7390775437f07|Bryan > Turner|bturner@atlassian.com|1406539543|Initial commit ---------------------------------------^^ The timestamp is also different than the above. > > > > :100644 100644 e965047ad7c57865823c7d992b1d046ea66edf78 > f9264f7fbd31ae7a18b7931ed8946fb0aebb0af3 M file.txt > bturner@ubuntu:/tmp/test.git$ > > Running a git bisect between v2.0.1, which does not manifest this > issue, and v2.0.2 fingers the following commit: > bturner@ubuntu:~/Development/oss/git/git$ git bisect bad > c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 is the first bad commit > commit c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 > Author: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> > Date: Tue Jun 10 17:43:02 2014 -0400 > > commit: convert commit->buffer to a slab > ATB, Ramsay Jones ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 9:42 git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 Bryan Turner 2014-07-28 10:18 ` Ramsay Jones @ 2014-07-28 10:35 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 10:44 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 10:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Turner; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Git Users On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 07:42:16PM +1000, Bryan Turner wrote: > Running a git bisect between v2.0.1, which does not manifest this > issue, and v2.0.2 fingers the following commit: > bturner@ubuntu:~/Development/oss/git/git$ git bisect bad > c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 is the first bad commit > commit c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 > Author: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> > Date: Tue Jun 10 17:43:02 2014 -0400 > > commit: convert commit->buffer to a slab I haven't reproduced here yet, but this is almost certainly the bug where lookup_unknown_object causes a bogus commit->index field (and prior to the commit you found, diff-tree did not use commit->index). The series that Junio has in jk/alloc-commit-id should fix the problem (it's in master already, and slated for v2.1.0). Junio, we should consider a v2.0.4 with that series, I think. This is a pretty serious regression in diff-tree (I didn't even realize that the buffer-slab work went into the maint series; that may have been a little ambitious). -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 10:35 ` Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 10:44 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 12:08 ` Bryan Turner 2014-07-28 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Turner; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Git Users On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 06:35:04AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > I haven't reproduced here yet, but this is almost certainly the bug > where lookup_unknown_object causes a bogus commit->index field (and > prior to the commit you found, diff-tree did not use commit->index). > > The series that Junio has in jk/alloc-commit-id should fix the problem > (it's in master already, and slated for v2.1.0). Yep, that's definitely it. Here's the minimum reproduction: git init git commit --allow-empty -m one git commit --allow-empty -m two git rev-list HEAD | git diff-tree --stdin --always --format=%s That yields: one one on v2.0.3, but merging in jk/alloc-commit-id yields: two one -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 10:44 ` Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 12:08 ` Bryan Turner 2014-07-28 15:35 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Bryan Turner @ 2014-07-28 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Git Users On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 06:35:04AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >> I haven't reproduced here yet, but this is almost certainly the bug >> where lookup_unknown_object causes a bogus commit->index field (and >> prior to the commit you found, diff-tree did not use commit->index). >> >> The series that Junio has in jk/alloc-commit-id should fix the problem >> (it's in master already, and slated for v2.1.0). > > Yep, that's definitely it. Here's the minimum reproduction: > > git init > git commit --allow-empty -m one > git commit --allow-empty -m two > git rev-list HEAD | git diff-tree --stdin --always --format=%s > > That yields: > > one > one > > on v2.0.3, but merging in jk/alloc-commit-id yields: > > two > one > > -Peff Thanks for digging into it, Jeff. I should have tried it against 2.1.0 myself. I've run my entire matrix of tests now against 2.1.0-rc0 and the diff-tree bug appears fixed on that tag. I noticed a different change, though: bturner@ubuntu:~/tmp/test$ /opt/git/2.1.0-rc0/bin/git check-ref-format ref/with/trailing/dot. bturner@ubuntu:~/tmp/test$ echo $? 0 bturner@ubuntu:~/tmp/test$ /opt/git/2.0.3/bin/git check-ref-format ref/with/trailing/dot. bturner@ubuntu:~/tmp/test$ echo $? 1 It looks like refs ending in a dot are now legal in 2.1.0? Is that intentional? A quick git bisect is fingering: bturner@ubuntu:~/Development/oss/git/git$ git bisect bad 745224e04a03e4544c58d5d38d3c54f67100f8eb is the first bad commit commit 745224e04a03e4544c58d5d38d3c54f67100f8eb Author: David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com> Date: Wed Jun 18 01:54:42 2014 -0400 Best regards, Bryan Turner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 12:08 ` Bryan Turner @ 2014-07-28 15:35 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-28 15:48 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-28 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Turner; +Cc: Jeff King, Git Users Bryan Turner <bturner@atlassian.com> writes: > It looks like refs ending in a dot are now legal in 2.1.0? Is that > intentional? A quick git bisect is fingering: > bturner@ubuntu:~/Development/oss/git/git$ git bisect bad > 745224e04a03e4544c58d5d38d3c54f67100f8eb is the first bad commit > commit 745224e04a03e4544c58d5d38d3c54f67100f8eb > Author: David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com> > Date: Wed Jun 18 01:54:42 2014 -0400 Thanks for a report. I am tempted to revert that series; it already caused "oops, this needs a further fix" before it hit 'master' at least once, and we do not want any more headaches at this point in the release cycle. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 15:35 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-28 15:48 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 08:35:52AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I am tempted to revert that series; it already caused "oops, this > needs a further fix" before it hit 'master' at least once, and we do > not want any more headaches at this point in the release cycle. Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me. I'm a little doubtful of its value (and maintainability) at all, but certainly I do not think it would be a big deal to push it off for one more cycle if David wants to rework it. If you do revert it, we may want a test like below. That will make sure the case is covered for future attempts. -- >8 -- Subject: [PATCH] t1402: check for refs ending with a dot This has been illegal since cbdffe4 (check_ref_format(): tighten refname rules, 2009-03-21), but we never tested it. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> --- t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh b/t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh index 9aeb352..8d2f75f 100755 --- a/t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh +++ b/t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ invalid_ref './foo/bar' invalid_ref 'foo/./bar' invalid_ref 'foo/bar/.' invalid_ref '.refs/foo' +invalid_ref 'refs/heads/foo.' invalid_ref 'heads/foo..bar' invalid_ref 'heads/foo?bar' valid_ref 'foo./bar' -- 2.0.0.566.gfe3e6b2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 10:35 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 10:44 ` Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-28 17:37 ` Jeff King 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-28 17:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 07:42:16PM +1000, Bryan Turner wrote: > >> Running a git bisect between v2.0.1, which does not manifest this >> issue, and v2.0.2 fingers the following commit: >> bturner@ubuntu:~/Development/oss/git/git$ git bisect bad >> c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 is the first bad commit >> commit c1b3c71f4b4571abb2b2a457122fd100dc9f7eb0 >> Author: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> >> Date: Tue Jun 10 17:43:02 2014 -0400 >> >> commit: convert commit->buffer to a slab > > I haven't reproduced here yet, but this is almost certainly the bug > where lookup_unknown_object causes a bogus commit->index field (and > prior to the commit you found, diff-tree did not use commit->index). > > The series that Junio has in jk/alloc-commit-id should fix the problem > (it's in master already, and slated for v2.1.0). > > Junio, we should consider a v2.0.4 with that series, I think. This is a > pretty serious regression in diff-tree (I didn't even realize that the > buffer-slab work went into the maint series; that may have been a little > ambitious). Or v2.0.4 without that series, which is how we usually do things, but let me see if jk/alloc-commit-id is easily applicable there first. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-28 17:37 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 18:01 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:32:45AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Junio, we should consider a v2.0.4 with that series, I think. This is a > > pretty serious regression in diff-tree (I didn't even realize that the > > buffer-slab work went into the maint series; that may have been a little > > ambitious). > > Or v2.0.4 without that series, which is how we usually do things, > but let me see if jk/alloc-commit-id is easily applicable there > first. Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way. Thanks for dealing with it. -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 17:37 ` Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 18:01 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 18:19 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 18:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 01:37:34PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:32:45AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > Junio, we should consider a v2.0.4 with that series, I think. This is a > > > pretty serious regression in diff-tree (I didn't even realize that the > > > buffer-slab work went into the maint series; that may have been a little > > > ambitious). > > > > Or v2.0.4 without that series, which is how we usually do things, > > but let me see if jk/alloc-commit-id is easily applicable there > > first. > > Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep > in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of > the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way. > > Thanks for dealing with it. Whatever we do, perhaps it is worth applying the test below on top? -- >8 -- Subject: t4013: test diff-tree's --stdin commit formatting Once upon a time, git-log was just "rev-list | diff-tree", and we did not bother to test it separately. These days git-log is implemented internally, but we want to make sure that the rev-list to diff-tree pipeline continues to function. Let's add a basic sanity test. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> --- t/t4013-diff-various.sh | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t4013-diff-various.sh b/t/t4013-diff-various.sh index 805b055..6ec6072 100755 --- a/t/t4013-diff-various.sh +++ b/t/t4013-diff-various.sh @@ -324,4 +324,14 @@ test_expect_success 'diff --cached -- file on unborn branch' ' test_cmp "$TEST_DIRECTORY/t4013/diff.diff_--cached_--_file0" result ' +test_expect_success 'diff-tree --stdin with log formatting' ' + cat >expect <<-\EOF && + Side + Third + Second + EOF + git rev-list master | git diff-tree --stdin --format=%s -s >actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + test_done -- 2.0.0.566.gfe3e6b2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 18:01 ` Jeff King @ 2014-07-28 18:19 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-29 0:11 ` Junio C Hamano 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-28 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 01:37:34PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:32:45AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> > > Junio, we should consider a v2.0.4 with that series, I think. This is a >> > > pretty serious regression in diff-tree (I didn't even realize that the >> > > buffer-slab work went into the maint series; that may have been a little >> > > ambitious). >> > >> > Or v2.0.4 without that series, which is how we usually do things, >> > but let me see if jk/alloc-commit-id is easily applicable there >> > first. >> >> Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep >> in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of >> the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way. >> >> Thanks for dealing with it. > > Whatever we do, perhaps it is worth applying the test below on top? Yeah, thanks. I think that is a good idea. I was preparing a patch to tuck your minimum reproduction at the end of 4202, but your version and placement makes good sense. > -- >8 -- > Subject: t4013: test diff-tree's --stdin commit formatting > > Once upon a time, git-log was just "rev-list | diff-tree", > and we did not bother to test it separately. These days git-log > is implemented internally, but we want to make sure that the > rev-list to diff-tree pipeline continues to function. Let's > add a basic sanity test. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> > --- > t/t4013-diff-various.sh | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/t/t4013-diff-various.sh b/t/t4013-diff-various.sh > index 805b055..6ec6072 100755 > --- a/t/t4013-diff-various.sh > +++ b/t/t4013-diff-various.sh > @@ -324,4 +324,14 @@ test_expect_success 'diff --cached -- file on unborn branch' ' > test_cmp "$TEST_DIRECTORY/t4013/diff.diff_--cached_--_file0" result > ' > > +test_expect_success 'diff-tree --stdin with log formatting' ' > + cat >expect <<-\EOF && > + Side > + Third > + Second > + EOF > + git rev-list master | git diff-tree --stdin --format=%s -s >actual && > + test_cmp expect actual > +' > + > test_done ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-28 18:19 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-29 0:11 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-29 1:06 ` Bryan Turner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-29 0:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeff King; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: >>> Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep >>> in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of >>> the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way. >>> >>> Thanks for dealing with it. >> >> Whatever we do, perhaps it is worth applying the test below on top? > > Yeah, thanks. I think that is a good idea. I was preparing a patch > to tuck your minimum reproduction at the end of 4202, but your version > and placement makes good sense. OK, I pushed out updated 'maint' and 'master'. The former merges a rebased version of jk/alloc-commit-id in to make the "reorganize the way we manage the in-core commit data" topic, and the latter reverts the "Use SSE to micro-optimize a leaf function to check the format of a ref string". Please give them some quick sanity check. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-29 0:11 ` Junio C Hamano @ 2014-07-29 1:06 ` Bryan Turner 2014-07-29 7:54 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Bryan Turner @ 2014-07-29 1:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Jeff King, Git Users On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > >>>> Yeah, I'm fine with a straight revert, too (I think it is fine to keep >>>> in master, though). I think jk/alloc-commit-id is built right on top of >>>> the original commit-slab topic, so it should be easy to do either way. >>>> >>>> Thanks for dealing with it. >>> >>> Whatever we do, perhaps it is worth applying the test below on top? >> >> Yeah, thanks. I think that is a good idea. I was preparing a patch >> to tuck your minimum reproduction at the end of 4202, but your version >> and placement makes good sense. > > OK, I pushed out updated 'maint' and 'master'. The former merges > a rebased version of jk/alloc-commit-id in to make the "reorganize > the way we manage the in-core commit data" topic, and the latter > reverts the "Use SSE to micro-optimize a leaf function to check the > format of a ref string". > > Please give them some quick sanity check. > > Thanks. Thanks both of you; I appreciate your efforts! I've run my suite of tests against the tips of master and maint and all 681 pass for each. Looks good to me. Best regards, Bryan Turner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 2014-07-29 1:06 ` Bryan Turner @ 2014-07-29 7:54 ` Jeff King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Jeff King @ 2014-07-29 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Turner; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, Git Users On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:06:25AM +1000, Bryan Turner wrote: > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > > > OK, I pushed out updated 'maint' and 'master'. The former merges > > a rebased version of jk/alloc-commit-id in to make the "reorganize > > the way we manage the in-core commit data" topic, and the latter > > reverts the "Use SSE to micro-optimize a leaf function to check the > > format of a ref string". > > > > Please give them some quick sanity check. They both look OK to me. > Thanks both of you; I appreciate your efforts! I've run my suite of > tests against the tips of master and maint and all 681 pass for each. > Looks good to me. So what suite of tests is this? Is it worth getting you to fold it into our regular test suite? :) -Peff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-07-29 7:55 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-07-28 9:42 git diff-tree commit detail bug in 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 Bryan Turner 2014-07-28 10:18 ` Ramsay Jones 2014-07-28 10:35 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 10:44 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 12:08 ` Bryan Turner 2014-07-28 15:35 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-28 15:48 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-28 17:37 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 18:01 ` Jeff King 2014-07-28 18:19 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-29 0:11 ` Junio C Hamano 2014-07-29 1:06 ` Bryan Turner 2014-07-29 7:54 ` Jeff King
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).