From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] builtin-clone: fix for new unpack_trees() semantics Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:58:50 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 10 11:59:27 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JYfj5-00006h-5A for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:59:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750967AbYCJK6t (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:58:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751118AbYCJK6t (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:58:49 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:35061 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750940AbYCJK6s (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:58:48 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2008 10:58:46 -0000 Received: from host86-138-198-40.range86-138.btcentralplus.com (EHLO racer.home) [86.138.198.40] by mail.gmx.net (mp026) with SMTP; 10 Mar 2008 11:58:46 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX190SURt/Xt04Wzlv4DkwvCxGWxt8rOQN41xYb9osC un0fxEIEx4Y7Lb X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Yes. And this sets dst_index (what I tried to hint at with my patch). > > Oh, yes. Your patch is what prompted me to fix that part (and to find > that Linus's unpack_trees was in next now). But seeing src_index in your > patch made me wonder what it wanted a source index for anyway, since > this is the first index we've had in this repo. Well, stupid copy-'n-paste. Well, not all that stupid: because of the twoway_merge (and because the segmentation fault was in a line accessing src_index), I assumed that the src_index is needed. But your explanation that oneway_merge is all we want makes tons of sense. Ciao, Dscho