From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: bisect and gitk happy together Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:10:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <46a038f90606120441p74dd4872y441fe04470f4acd5@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 12 17:10:39 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 1Fpo3f-0000Q9-4K for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:10:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752030AbWFLPKY (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:10:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752031AbWFLPKY (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:10:24 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:31144 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752030AbWFLPKX (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:10:23 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k5CFAKgt014621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:10:20 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k5CFAJr4024013; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:10:19 -0700 To: Martin Langhoff In-Reply-To: <46a038f90606120441p74dd4872y441fe04470f4acd5@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.75__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.135 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Martin Langhoff wrote: > > - git-bisect visualise wasn't as useful as just a plain gitk. (This > may be because I was working with ~60 commits in a medium-sized > project). Definitely. Try just firing up gitk when you're bisecting a kernel archive with thousands of commits, and complex history.. That's when "git bisect visualize" really helps: when git bisect has already narrowed down the list of commits from "5 years" to "1 week", but you still have maybe a hundred-odd commits to go. I agree that just plain "gitk" is actually nicer if you want to see the whole context. It's just that often the context is pretty damn confusing ;) > - gitk didn't show the bad commit tagged specially, even if > git-bisect had just identified it. Of course I could find it, but I > had all the other good/bad commits well labelled. And not the one I > was looking for. Odd. It should be the head of the "bisect" branch, and naturally tagged that way. Linus