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
next prev 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).