From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: SIGSEGV in merge recursive Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 18:30:59 -0800 Message-ID: <7vvejshk4c.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <10871.51671.qm@web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Dec 31 03:31:12 2006 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 1H0qTa-0002NX-Lo for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 03:31:07 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932679AbWLaCbD (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:31:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932683AbWLaCbD (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:31:03 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao03.cox.net ([68.230.241.36]:57850 "EHLO fed1rmmtao03.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932679AbWLaCbB (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:31:01 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061231023100.ZKJS29122.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:31:00 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id 5EWE1W00D1kojtg0000000; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:30:15 -0500 To: ltuikov@yahoo.com In-Reply-To: <10871.51671.qm@web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (Luben Tuikov's message of "Sat, 30 Dec 2006 17:42:06 -0800 (PST)") 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: Luben Tuikov writes: > So it appears that the fix is in "master", but not in "next". > > Junio, can you confirm this? It was merged into 'next' with 1e48a691, about 2 hours after I merged the fix 5d6b151f to 'master'. Sometimes when I have a fix that is urgent enough, I push out only 'master' before merging and retesting it in 'next', so it is plausible that your fetch grabbed such a state.