From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: git bisect with history manipulation Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:42:25 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Oct 23 17:43:54 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 1Gc1xe-0006S1-AI for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:43:34 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932129AbWJWPnb (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:43:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932152AbWJWPnb (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:43:31 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:22184 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932129AbWJWPna (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:43:30 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Gc1wr-0006EI-W2 for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:42:46 +0200 Received: from host-81-190-23-110.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.23.110]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:42:45 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-23-110.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2006 17:42:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-23-110.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds wrote: > So depending on the problem, you can try two different approaches. [The approaches being: 1) applying patchseries before testing, and marking the commit before applying as good or bad for bisect; 2) rebasing (applying) the patch-series on top of current kernel, and bisecting the series] You can try yet another approach, namely rebase v2.6.15..v2.6.18 on top of your patch-series applied to v2.6.15, and bisect that. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git