From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Funny: git -p submodule summary Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:38:59 -0800 Message-ID: <7vaba024zw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20090109083836.GB21389@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7veizc25e8.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090109093307.GA2039@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 09 10:40:55 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 1LLDr3-0007JF-52 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 10:40:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751713AbZAIJjM (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:39:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753801AbZAIJjJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:39:09 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:60865 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751423AbZAIJjG (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:39:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28BEF8ED4C; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:39:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 345DB8ED4B; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:39:02 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20090109093307.GA2039@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 9 Jan 2009 04:33:07 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5B8A1390-DE31-11DD-81F6-5720C92D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 01:30:23AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> This arrangement to have the third process could even open the possibility >> of having it read from git and write to pager, and not launching the pager >> if there is no interesting data from git to feed it with. >> >> I do not know if I like the performance implications associated with it, >> though. > > Ugh. That has definitely been a requested feature, but the thought of > essentially running "cat" in our pipeline strikes me as a bit kludgey. > > On the other hand, we are by definition going to the pager in that case, > so in theory performance is less of a consideration. > > But see my other mail for why a third process is hard to always do on > Windows. Heh, this late at night just before going to bed, I am allowed to say that I do not care about Windows at all ;-). More dedicated and competent people will solve it for us while I am sleeping.