From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bisect: add checks at the beginning of "git bisect run". Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:22:56 -0700 Message-ID: <7vps6vqhf3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20070327064957.34dad72a.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <7vzm5zs1aq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200703270915.12408.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 27 09:23:21 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HW61Y-0006yq-Md for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:23:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965312AbXC0HW6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 03:22:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965310AbXC0HW6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 03:22:58 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao101.cox.net ([68.230.241.45]:60858 "EHLO fed1rmmtao101.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965312AbXC0HW5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 03:22:57 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070327072256.VYUZ748.fed1rmmtao101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 03:22:56 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id fjNw1W00J1kojtg0000000; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 03:22:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200703270915.12408.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> (Christian Couder's message of "Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:15:12 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Christian Couder writes: > Without the first "test -d blah", if "bisect start" was not already used, > then the user will only see : > > 'You need to give me at least one good and one bad revisions.' > > And then when using "git bisect good" or "git bisect bad" to give good or > bad revision: > > 'You need to start by "git bisect start" > Do you want me to do it for you [Y/n]?' Doesn't that suggest the existing messages from "git bisect good/bad" can use the same improvement you added only to "bisect run"?