From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix multiple issues in index-pack Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:31:54 -0700 Message-ID: <7vskqr2bsl.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 21 00:43:54 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1Ks2NK-0008VS-RO for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:33:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753084AbYJTVcH (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:32:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753186AbYJTVcH (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:32:07 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:60234 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752973AbYJTVcG (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:32:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBFB771C76; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:32:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [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 A180371C72; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:32:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Nicolas Pitre's message of "Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:46:19 -0400 (EDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 8A1D5C26-9EEE-11DD-9CE2-9CEDC82D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre writes: > Damn... this one was subtle. And I'm still wondering how the hell the > test suite is able to pass with this. I'll try to figure out why and > come up with better tests. Thanks; much appreciated.