git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bisect: fix calculation of the number of suspicious revisions
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:27:29 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703211521290.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070321210454.GA2844@lala>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1105 bytes --]



On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>
> Up to now the number printed was calculated assuming that the current revision
> to test is bad.  Given that it's not possible that this always matches the
> number of suspicious revs if the current one is good, the maximum of both is
> taken now.

How about adding a new flag to "git-rev-list", to make it count both ways? 
Doing this whole

	nr = $(eval "git-rev-list ... | wc -l")

was ugly to begin with, and you just made it doubly ugly.

And the thing is, "git-rev-list --bisect" will obviously already have 
calculated these numbers just to _pick_ the revision in the first place, 
so it's a bit sad then execute it twice more (giving it back the result 
*it* gave us in the first place!).

So we could perhaps change the original

	rev=$(eval "git-rev-list --bisect $good $bad -- $(cat $GIT_DIR/BISECT_NAMES)")

with something nicer.

(In fact, I would also suggest we drop or try to fix BISECT_NAMES support, 
while at it - it never really worked, and iirc it was partly exactly 
*because* of the end-condition not being handled right).

		Linus

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-03-21 22:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-03-16 16:14 [BUG] bisecting miscounts revisions left to test Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-17  0:50 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-03-17 13:46   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-17 14:12   ` [PATCH] calculate the maximal number of revisions " Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-17 17:49     ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-03-17 19:58       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-21 21:04         ` [PATCH] Bisect: fix calculation of the number of suspicious revisions Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-21 21:23           ` Junio C Hamano
2007-03-21 21:39             ` Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-21 21:34           ` Uwe Kleine-König
2007-03-21 21:49             ` Junio C Hamano
2007-03-21 22:27           ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-03-22  1:19             ` Junio C Hamano
2007-03-22  1:43             ` [PATCH] bisect: show the maximal number of commits to be tested Johannes Schindelin
2007-03-22  2:05               ` Junio C Hamano
2007-03-22  2:15                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-03-22  6:36               ` [PATCH 1/2] git-rev-list: add --bisect-vars option Junio C Hamano
2007-03-22  6:42               ` [PATCH 2/2] git-rev-list --bisect: optimization Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0703211521290.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).