From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] binary patch. Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 00:40:22 -0700 Message-ID: <7vwtcztxcp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vodyd2vqn.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vwtd10xyd.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vy7xgzsiu.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat May 06 09:40:32 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 1FcHOw-0007hb-VF for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 09:40:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751282AbWEFHkX (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2006 03:40:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751283AbWEFHkX (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2006 03:40:23 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:30973 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751282AbWEFHkX (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2006 03:40:23 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060506074022.VEEA25692.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Sat, 6 May 2006 03:40:22 -0400 To: git@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <7vy7xgzsiu.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 05 May 2006 03:15:53 -0700") 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: Junio C Hamano writes: >> Yeah, things still to be done are deflating both delta and >> optionally perhaps use just deflate without delta for "new file" >> codepath. >> >> And testsuite. > > -- >8 -- > [PATCH] binary diff: further updates. >... > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano > > --- > > * Have done only very minimum testing, and unlike somebody else ;-) > my code is not always perfect, so this will still stay out of > "next" for a while. OK, now it passes the testsuite I wrote, so I'll push this out in "next". I was not drunk while doing the testsuite so the code now must be perfect ;-).