From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-svnimport.perl: fix for 'arg list too long...' Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 12:27:33 -0800 Message-ID: <7v64nybz9m.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20060201155331.GE18078@sashak.voltaire.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Matthias Urlichs X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 01 21:27:50 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4OZp-0004X6-Lf for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:27:42 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161114AbWBAU1g (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 15:27:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161115AbWBAU1g (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 15:27:36 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:25808 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161114AbWBAU1f (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2006 15:27:35 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060201202630.PJBP15695.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 15:26:30 -0500 To: Sasha Khapyorsky User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Sasha Khapyorsky writes: > This fixes 'arg list too long..' problem with git-ls-files. I wonder if feeding the list into a pipe to 'update-index --stdin' would be an option. BTW, please do not do this: Mail-Followup-To: Junio C Hamano , Matthias Urlichs , git@vger.kernel.org It is simply rude. * I and/or Smurf may be uninterested in hearing the whole discussion thread started by you. We might well be, but that is not something you shoudl decide upfront in your message. * When a recipient of your message tries to "[R]eply" to *you*, that Mail-Followup-To: would cause the MUA to address that message to me and/or smurf by default, not to you. I had to edit the resulting To: header by hand to address this response to you. Why force extra work on others? I know why you did it --- you subscribe to git list and otherwise you would get two copies. That is _not_ a good excuse. That is how mailing lists work; either you filter the duplicates on your end, or you learn to live with it. Please don't force extra work on others. I think the only header mucking of this kind that is acceptable is to remove yourself from CC: line when the mailing list you subscribe to is already on the CC: line.