* [PATCH] Empty author may be presented by svn as an empty string or a null value.
From: Robin Rosenberg @ 2006-07-02 22:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
From: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com>
---
git-svnimport.perl | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/git-svnimport.perl b/git-svnimport.perl
index 38ac732..26dc454 100755
--- a/git-svnimport.perl
+++ b/git-svnimport.perl
@@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ sub commit {
my($author_name,$author_email,$dest);
my(@old,@new,@parents);
- if (not defined $author) {
+ if (not defined $author or $author eq "") {
$author_name = $author_email = "unknown";
} elsif (defined $users_file) {
die "User $author is not listed in $users_file\n"
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: qgit idea: interface for cherry-picking
From: Marco Costalba @ 2006-07-02 22:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Narebski; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <e89eqj$npu$1@sea.gmane.org>
On 7/2/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marco Costalba wrote:
>
> > On 7/2/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Currently in qgit one can git-format-patch a commit. It woul be nice
> >> if one would be able to git-cherry-pick and git-cherry-pick -n a commit
> >> (denoting the head, i.e. where cherry pick would be applied to). It would
> >> be very usefull in reordering patches (cleaning up history).
> >
> > Currently in qgit you can git-format-patch a commit series and git-am
> > a given patch file series.
> > This can be done transparently with a drag & drop mechanic:
> >
> > 1) Open the source repository
> > 2) Then open a new qgit instance (File->Open in a new window...)
> > 3) Open the destination repository in the new qgit window
> > 4) Drag & drop selected commits (multi selection in supported) from
> > source to destination.
>
> Does multi selection commits all selected commits as one merged commit?
>
No. Currently it's just a shortcut for git-format-patch --> git-am
> > I normally use this instead of git-cherry-pick that, I admit, I don't
> > know very well, so please I need some more hints on how to upgrade
> > this behaviour introducing git.cherry-pick support.
>
> I use git-cherry-pick -n to join few patches into one, or with editing the
> result to split one patch/commit into few smaller.
>
> git-cherry-pick [-n] <commit> picks up a commit and drops it on top of
> current branch. I'd like to see it in context menu for current commit,
> i.e. "cherry-pick to <head>", where <head> will be replaced by current
> branch name, or/and "cherry-pick -n to <head>".
>
>
>From the git-cherry-pick documentation I see -n option "applies the
change necessary to cherry-pick the named commit to your working tree,
but does not make the commit"
What do you think about this:
When dropping the selected commits, instead of creating new commits,
appears a message box with something like "Do you want to apply the
commits on top of your current branch or on your working directory?"
Sounds good for you? Or you still prefer the context menu?
In the latter case, if I have understood correctly, you are limited to
cherry-pick among branches and/or working directory of the _same_
repository.
Marco
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Git.xs: older perl do not know const char *
From: Petr Baudis @ 2006-07-02 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0607021152200.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:53:03AM CEST, I got a letter
where Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> said that...
> Both of these casts _should_ be safe, since you do not want to muck around
> with the version or the path anyway.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Acked-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
It isn't all that great but it seems everything xs does with this is to
feed it to sv_setpv() which AFAIK copies it around.
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.
Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Quick merge status updates.
From: Petr Baudis @ 2006-07-02 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <7v64if3d50.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:33:47PM CEST, I got a letter
where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> said that...
> I tried this:
>
> 0. check out the branch that has the Perly git ("pu"). build
> and install normally to have a perfectly working version
> accessible on your usual $PATH.
>
> 1. apply the patch [1] below to make it use "use lib" instead of
> "unshift".
>
> 2. break perl/Git.pm being built to pretend we introduced a bug
> in the work in progress by applying the patch [2] below.
>
> 3. without installing the broken Git.pm, run "make test", and
> see a test that uses "git pull" and needs to create a true
> merge succeed. It tells me that everything including
> perl/Git.pm is GOOD, and I'd find the breakage only after
> installing and running the test again.
So, just to clarify and make sure we understand each other perfectly,
you claim that when skipping (1), (3) _does_ FAIL for you? Because it
really doesn't for me and I can't see how could it ever fail without
installing the broken version first.
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.
Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: qgit idea: interface for cherry-picking
From: Jakub Narebski @ 2006-07-02 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <e5bfff550607021433l1987c32apf4453b52fc2f3e63@mail.gmail.com>
Marco Costalba wrote:
> On 7/2/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Currently in qgit one can git-format-patch a commit. It woul be nice
>> if one would be able to git-cherry-pick and git-cherry-pick -n a commit
>> (denoting the head, i.e. where cherry pick would be applied to). It would
>> be very usefull in reordering patches (cleaning up history).
>
> Currently in qgit you can git-format-patch a commit series and git-am
> a given patch file series.
> This can be done transparently with a drag & drop mechanic:
>
> 1) Open the source repository
> 2) Then open a new qgit instance (File->Open in a new window...)
> 3) Open the destination repository in the new qgit window
> 4) Drag & drop selected commits (multi selection in supported) from
> source to destination.
Does multi selection commits all selected commits as one merged commit?
> I normally use this instead of git-cherry-pick that, I admit, I don't
> know very well, so please I need some more hints on how to upgrade
> this behaviour introducing git.cherry-pick support.
I use git-cherry-pick -n to join few patches into one, or with editing the
result to split one patch/commit into few smaller.
git-cherry-pick [-n] <commit> picks up a commit and drops it on top of
current branch. I'd like to see it in context menu for current commit,
i.e. "cherry-pick to <head>", where <head> will be replaced by current
branch name, or/and "cherry-pick -n to <head>".
--
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: A note on merging conflicts..
From: Daniel Barkalow @ 2006-07-02 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rene Scharfe
Cc: Linus Torvalds, J. Bruce Fields, Junio C Hamano, git,
Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <20060702113133.GA11529@lsrfire.ath.cx>
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Rene Scharfe wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 07:45:33PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> > That is: (this only has the logic portion, and it's against master, so it
> > isn't actually a really working patch or anything; also, it doesn't handle
> > "--not a...b" correctly, whatever that should mean)
>
> [concept patch snipped]
>
> You mean something like the patch below? It seems to work, but in my
> unscientific tests it's significant slower than the version based on
> get_merge_bases() (0.17s vs 0.05s for
> "git-rev-list 89719209...262a6ef7 66ae0c77...ced9456a"). Did I do
> something wrong?
>
> You had no mark_parents_left_right() in your patch. I added it because
> otherwise it wouldn't remove any common commits. Was this supposed to
> work some other way?
I'd been assuming that there was something that would propagate flags to
parents in general in add_parents_to_list(). Of course, that doesn't make
sense for arbitrary flags. It might be better to handle it there, and
avoid traversing parent lists twice.
I'm surprised that it isn't faster than using get_merge_bases(); I'd
expect it to be faster than the call to get_merge_bases(), let alone
get_merge_bases() plus the processing of output candidates. It should be
doing less work that get_merge_bases() ultimately does (since
get_merge_bases() has to do the boundary calculation after doing
practically everything that the left and right addition to revision.c
does), so there's clearly something strange going on.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
^ permalink raw reply
* Making perl scripts include the correct Git.pm
From: Petr Baudis @ 2006-07-02 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Hi,
the discussion of the topic became so scatterred that it's rather
difficult to follow now and I get a feeling that we are kind of running
in circles now, so this is my attempt to summarize it:
Desired behaviour when running Git's perl scripts (ordered by
degree of necessity):
(D1) When running installed script, it should include Git.pm from the
same installation.
(D2) When running the testsuite, it should include Git.pm from the
source tree.
(D3) When running script directly from source tree, it should include
Git.pm from the source tree.
(i) The original solution passed -I on the #!/usr/bin/perl line, but
that was ugly, was prone to hit various OS limits on the shebang line
and violated both (D2) and (D3).
(ii) My proposed second solution was to add an autogenerated line to
the Git's perl scripts saying something like:
use lib ('instlibdir', 'srclibdir');
This fulfills all (D1), (D2) and (D3), but is perceived by Junio as
"disgusting".
(iii) The currently used solution is to effectively
use lib ('instlibdir');
to the Git's perl scripts. This violated (D3) and (D2) too, since
use lib is the last from all the @INC modifiers to be seen and thus
overrides and $PERL5LIB set in the testsuite.
(iv) Variation of (iii), probably Junio's original intention when
implementing it:
push @INC, 'instlibdir';
This fulfills (D2). It does not fulfill (D3) per se since the user
has to set $PERL5LIB manually when running Git without installing it,
but it is at least fulfillable. However, most importantly this does
not even fulfill (D1) since if you e.g. consider user-local installation
of Git over system-wide installation of Git, local perl scripts will
use the globally installed Git.pm.
(v) If you throw away user-friendly (D3) requirement and insist
on (iii) being disgusting, this is a newly proposed possible variation
"(iv) meets (i)":
#!/usr/bin/perl -Imarker
@INC = map { $_ eq 'marker' ? 'instlibdir' : $_ } @INC;
(I think this is more disgusting than (iii), but tastes differ. ;)
So, what's the way out?
PS: Is this the only remaining problem with Git.pm or do we have
anything else to cope with, esp. before it gets considered to be a
next material?
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.
Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: qgit idea: interface for cherry-picking
From: Marco Costalba @ 2006-07-02 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Narebski; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <e8954u$srh$1@sea.gmane.org>
On 7/2/06, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Currently in qgit one can git-format-patch a commit. It woul be nice if one
> would be able to git-cherry-pick and git-cherry-pick -n a commit (denoting
> the head, i.e. where cherry pick would be applied to). It would be very
> usefull in reordering patches (cleaning up history).
>
> --
Currently in qgit you can git-format-patch a commit series and git-am
a given patch file series.
This can be done transparently with a drag & drop mechanic:
1) Open the source repository
2) Then open a new qgit instance (File->Open in a new window...)
3) Open the destination repository in the new qgit window
4) Drag & drop selected commits (multi selection in supported) from
source to destination.
I normally use this instead of git-cherry-pick that, I admit, I don't
know very well, so please I need some more hints on how to upgrade
this behaviour introducing git.cherry-pick support.
Marco
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Quick merge status updates.
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-07-02 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Petr Baudis; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20060702204906.GG29115@pasky.or.cz>
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:
> So the purpose of the original patch was to make it play nicely with
> $PERLLIB, but unshifting helps nothing, since:
>
> There's default @INC
> Perl spots PERLLIB and unshifts @INC
> We then unshift @INC too, taking precedence
I tried this:
0. check out the branch that has the Perly git ("pu"). build
and install normally to have a perfectly working version
accessible on your usual $PATH.
1. apply the patch [1] below to make it use "use lib" instead of
"unshift".
2. break perl/Git.pm being built to pretend we introduced a bug
in the work in progress by applying the patch [2] below.
3. without installing the broken Git.pm, run "make test", and
see a test that uses "git pull" and needs to create a true
merge succeed. It tells me that everything including
perl/Git.pm is GOOD, and I'd find the breakage only after
installing and running the test again.
If you make the freshly built script to say "use lib" to use
Git.pm and its friends from the installed location, it defeats
the attempt by test-lib.sh to override it to test what we
freshly built -- the use of "unshift @INC" is to work that
around and is parallel to the way Python stuff works around the
same problem.
[Footnotes]
*1* "use lib" patch.
diff --git a/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl b/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl
index 1b23fa1..3a42950 100755
--- a/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl
+++ b/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ #
# Read .git/FETCH_HEAD and make a human readable merge message
# by grouping branches and tags together to form a single line.
-BEGIN { unshift @INC, '@@INSTLIBDIR@@'; }
+use lib '@@INSTLIBDIR@@';
use strict;
use Git;
use Error qw(:try);
*2* "break Git.pm" patch.
diff --git a/perl/Git.pm b/perl/Git.pm
index b4ee88b..34b4f12 100644
--- a/perl/Git.pm
+++ b/perl/Git.pm
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ Git - Perl interface to the Git version
package Git;
+syntax error -- kill me
use strict;
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [POSSIBLE REGRESSION] Spurious revs after patch "revision.c: --full-history fix"
From: Marco Costalba @ 2006-07-02 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: junkio, git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607021012180.12404@g5.osdl.org>
>
> Gaah. Does this trivial patch fix it for you?
>
Yes. It works.
Thanks
Marco
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-07-02 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rene Scharfe; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <44A8339B.7070608@lsrfire.ath.cx>
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Rene Scharfe wrote:
>
> I have an idea. Would it help to gather a list of all commit object
> flags from the different files? And then we would come up with unique
> names? And then move the definition of all of them to commit.h?
We already did that once, for a subset of the programs. Except we put them
in revision.h instead ;)
And yes, we should probably do it for most of the rest.
Some of them (git-show-branch) have really special flags usage, and don't
want to pollute their magic flags with anybody else at all, but most of
the rest (fetch.c etc) have just a few flags and could in fact mostly
re-use the standard ones.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Rene Scharfe @ 2006-07-02 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <44A8339B.7070608@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Rene Scharfe schrieb:
> Junio C Hamano schrieb:
>> Gaah. commit.c defines its own UNINTERESTING and you rely on
>> not including revision.h which is ... gasp ... #$@#$!!!
> I have an idea. Would it help to gather a list of all commit object
> flags from the different files? And then we would come up with unique
> names? And then move the definition of all of them to commit.h?
Err, I mean object flags (not only commit flags) and object.h instead of
commit.h.
René
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Rene Scharfe @ 2006-07-02 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <7vmzbr50b3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Junio C Hamano schrieb:
> Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> writes:
>
>>> I suspect the only way to fix that is to make "get_merge_bases()" not use
>>> UNINTERESTING at all, but instead just explicitly use something like
>> No and yes. Patch 1 in the 3+1 series changes the flags used in
>> commit.c to not conflict with the ones in revision.h[*]. So we have two
>> different UNINTERESTINGs, and get_merge_bases() doesn't mess up the
>> show/no-show markings.
>
> Gaah. commit.c defines its own UNINTERESTING and you rely on
> not including revision.h which is ... gasp ... #$@#$!!!
You mean crap? Yes, it is. That's why I said we should centralize the
commit flags. There are several duplicate names for different commit
flags in different files. I couldn't come up with a clean solution, though.
I have an idea. Would it help to gather a list of all commit object
flags from the different files? And then we would come up with unique
names? And then move the definition of all of them to commit.h?
René
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] Git.pm: Don't #define around die
From: Petr Baudis @ 2006-07-02 20:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Johannes Schindelin, git
In-Reply-To: <7v4pxz4yki.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 09:05:33PM CEST, I got a letter
where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> said that...
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> > Error: 'const char *' not in typemap in Git.xs, line 69
> > Error: 'const char *' not in typemap in Git.xs, line 79
> > make: *** [Git.c] Error 1
> >
> > It seems like my typemap starts like this:
> >...
> > So, no "const char *". See next mail for a minimal patch.
>
> An alternative would be to carry our own typemap but I think
> your fix is less intrusive and fine. Pasky?
Yes, it should be fine.
> > The warning
> > (IIRC that was mentioned already on the list) still persists:
> >
> > cc -c -I. -I.. -g -pipe -pipe -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -flat_namespace
> > -DHAS_TELLDIR_PROTOTYPE -fno-strict-aliasing -Os -DVERSION=\"0.01\"
> > -DXS_VERSION=\"0.01\" -I/System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE -I/sw/include
> > -DSHA1_HEADER='<openssl/sha.h>' -DNO_STRCASESTR -DNO_STRLCPY
> > -DGIT_VERSION='"1.4.1.g3b26"' Git.c
> > In file included from /System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE/perl.h:500,
> > from Git.xs:15:
> > /System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE/embed.h:156:1: warning: "die" redefined
> > Git.xs:11:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
>
> I see the same here.
-8<-
Back in the old days, we called Git's die() from the .xs code, but we had to
hijack Perl's die() for that. Now we don't call Git's die() so no need to do
the hijacking and it silences a compiler warning.
Signed-off-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
---
perl/Git.xs | 4 ----
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/perl/Git.xs b/perl/Git.xs
index 51bfac3..1e6c1eb 100644
--- a/perl/Git.xs
+++ b/perl/Git.xs
@@ -8,15 +8,11 @@ #include <ctype.h>
#include "../cache.h"
#include "../exec_cmd.h"
-#define die perlyshadow_die__
-
/* XS and Perl interface */
#include "EXTERN.h"
#include "perl.h"
#include "XSUB.h"
-#undef die
-
static char *
report_xs(const char *prefix, const char *err, va_list params)
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.
Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: Quick merge status updates.
From: Petr Baudis @ 2006-07-02 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pavel Roskin; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git
In-Reply-To: <1151489103.28036.6.camel@dv>
Dear diary, on Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:05:03PM CEST, I got a letter
where Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> said that...
> I think the BEGIN block has priority over other statements. My solution
> was to put the @INC change in the BEGIN block as well.
>
> This patch is working for me:
>
> diff --git a/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl b/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl
> index e8fad02..1b23fa1 100755
> --- a/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl
> +++ b/git-fmt-merge-msg.perl
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ #
> # Read .git/FETCH_HEAD and make a human readable merge message
> # by grouping branches and tags together to form a single line.
>
> -unshift @INC, '@@INSTLIBDIR@@';
> +BEGIN { unshift @INC, '@@INSTLIBDIR@@'; }
> use strict;
> use Git;
> use Error qw(:try);
I feel that it is time for another stupid question of mine - why can't
you just use lib?
use lib ('@@INSTLIBDIR@@');
Looks a lot better than some @INC unshifting, and it should be
equivalent.
Let's pour in to the confusion:
The unshifting was introduced w/o BEGIN{} in
From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Introduce Git.pm (v4)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 04:57:31 -0700
but that patch is not in pu anymore while the description of the new
patch implicitly refers to it, which made it all a bit confusing.
So the purpose of the original patch was to make it play nicely with
$PERLLIB, but unshifting helps nothing, since:
There's default @INC
Perl spots PERLLIB and unshifts @INC
We then unshift @INC too, taking precedence
So didn't the original patch rather want to do push?
$ PERL5LIB=perl perl -le "BEGIN { unshift @INC, '/home/xpasky/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/i686-linux'; } use Git; print Git::hash_object('blob','Makefile');"
17842a3657ae8e5b4fd3ddfeb69268a4b94cb97a
$ PERL5LIB=perl perl -le "use Git; print Git::hash_object('blob','Makefile');"
syntax error at perl/Git.pm line 44, near "h>"
(after inserting random junk to perl/Git.pm)
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise.
Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-07-02 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rene Scharfe; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <44A8051D.6040605@lsrfire.ath.cx>
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Rene Scharfe wrote:
>
> No and yes. Patch 1 in the 3+1 series changes the flags used in
> commit.c to not conflict with the ones in revision.h[*]. So we have two
> different UNINTERESTINGs, and get_merge_bases() doesn't mess up the
> show/no-show markings.
Gaah. So UNINTERESTING in commit.c needs something else than everywhere
else? That's a bug waiting to happen.
Please give it a name of its own.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Git.pm: Avoid ppport.h
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-07-02 19:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: git, Petr Baudis
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0607021141260.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>> This makes us not include ppport.h which seems not to give us anything real
>> anyway; it is useful for checking for portability warts but since Devel::PPPort
>> is a portability wart itself, we shouldn't require it for build.
>
> Why do people introduce a "portability enhancer" like that? This is soo
> dumb.
I think that statement is a bit too harsh.
My understanding is that it's more for use by developers working
with later version to produce portability headers, so used that
way it is very sane. From its manual page:
How to use ppport.h
Don't direct the users of your module to download "Devel::PPPort".
They are most probably no XS writers. Also, don't make ppport.h
optional. Rather, just take the most recent copy of ppport.h that you
can find (e.g. by generating it with the latest "Devel::PPPort" release
from CPAN), copy it into your project, adjust your project to use it,
and distribute the header along with your module.
But in the case of source distribution, and if the source
distribution wants to be compatible with older versions, the
above advice does not apply.
> Error: 'const char *' not in typemap in Git.xs, line 69
> Error: 'const char *' not in typemap in Git.xs, line 79
> make: *** [Git.c] Error 1
>
> It seems like my typemap starts like this:
>...
> So, no "const char *". See next mail for a minimal patch.
An alternative would be to carry our own typemap but I think
your fix is less intrusive and fine. Pasky?
> The warning
> (IIRC that was mentioned already on the list) still persists:
>
> cc -c -I. -I.. -g -pipe -pipe -fno-common -no-cpp-precomp -flat_namespace
> -DHAS_TELLDIR_PROTOTYPE -fno-strict-aliasing -Os -DVERSION=\"0.01\"
> -DXS_VERSION=\"0.01\" -I/System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE -I/sw/include
> -DSHA1_HEADER='<openssl/sha.h>' -DNO_STRCASESTR -DNO_STRLCPY
> -DGIT_VERSION='"1.4.1.g3b26"' Git.c
> In file included from /System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE/perl.h:500,
> from Git.xs:15:
> /System/Library/Perl/darwin/CORE/embed.h:156:1: warning: "die" redefined
> Git.xs:11:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
I see the same here.
^ permalink raw reply
* qgit idea: interface for cherry-picking
From: Jakub Narebski @ 2006-07-02 19:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Currently in qgit one can git-format-patch a commit. It woul be nice if one
would be able to git-cherry-pick and git-cherry-pick -n a commit (denoting
the head, i.e. where cherry pick would be applied to). It would be very
usefull in reordering patches (cleaning up history).
--
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] Makefile: replace ugly and unportable sed invocation
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-07-02 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0607021109540.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> First of all, it is _ugly_ (three invocations of sed, where one
> really is sufficient). Then, it uses the non-portable ';'
> operator, and then, the non-at-all-portable 'T'.
>
> And worst: it is unnecessary.
Thanks -- I was not paying enough attention.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-07-02 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rene Scharfe; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <44A8051D.6040605@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> writes:
>> I suspect the only way to fix that is to make "get_merge_bases()" not use
>> UNINTERESTING at all, but instead just explicitly use something like
>
> No and yes. Patch 1 in the 3+1 series changes the flags used in
> commit.c to not conflict with the ones in revision.h[*]. So we have two
> different UNINTERESTINGs, and get_merge_bases() doesn't mess up the
> show/no-show markings.
Gaah. commit.c defines its own UNINTERESTING and you rely on
not including revision.h which is ... gasp ... #$@#$!!!
Could we do something like this, pretty please?
---
diff --git a/commit.c b/commit.c
index 94c1d0e..a608faf 100644
--- a/commit.c
+++ b/commit.c
@@ -851,14 +851,14 @@ void sort_in_topological_order_fn(struct
/* bits #0..7 in revision.h */
#define PARENT1 (1u<< 8)
#define PARENT2 (1u<< 9)
-#define UNINTERESTING (1u<<10)
+#define STALE (1u<<10)
static struct commit *interesting(struct commit_list *list)
{
while (list) {
struct commit *commit = list->item;
list = list->next;
- if (commit->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
+ if (commit->object.flags & STALE)
continue;
return commit;
}
@@ -920,17 +920,17 @@ static struct commit *interesting(struct
*
* Next, we pop B and something very interesting happens. It has flags==3
* so it is also placed on the result list, and its parents are marked
- * uninteresting, retroactively, and placed back on the list:
+ * stale, retroactively, and placed back on the list:
*
* list=C(7), result=C(7) B(3)
*
* Now, list does not have any interesting commit. So we find the newest
- * commit from the result list that is not marked uninteresting. Which is
+ * commit from the result list that is not marked stale. Which is
* commit B.
*
*
* Another pathological example how this thing used to fail to mark an
- * ancestor of a merge base as UNINTERESTING before we introduced the
+ * ancestor of a merge base as STALE before we introduced the
* postprocessing phase (mark_reachable_commits).
*
* 2
@@ -960,8 +960,8 @@ static struct commit *interesting(struct
* C7 2 3 7 1 3 2 1 2
*
* At this point, unfortunately, everybody in the list is
- * uninteresting, so we fail to complete the following two
- * steps to fully marking uninteresting commits.
+ * stale, so we fail to complete the following two
+ * steps to fully marking stale commits.
*
* D7 2 3 7 7 3 2 1 2
* E7 2 3 7 7 7 2 1 2
@@ -981,10 +981,10 @@ static void mark_reachable_commits(struc
*/
for (tmp = result; tmp; tmp = tmp->next) {
struct commit *c = tmp->item;
- /* Reinject uninteresting ones to list,
+ /* Reinject stale ones to list,
* so we can scan their parents.
*/
- if (c->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
+ if (c->object.flags & STALE)
commit_list_insert(c, &list);
}
while (list) {
@@ -995,8 +995,8 @@ static void mark_reachable_commits(struc
list = list->next;
free(tmp);
- /* Anything taken out of the list is uninteresting, so
- * mark all its parents uninteresting. We do not
+ /* Anything taken out of the list is stale, so
+ * mark all its parents stale. We do not
* parse new ones (we already parsed all the relevant
* ones).
*/
@@ -1004,8 +1004,8 @@ static void mark_reachable_commits(struc
while (parents) {
struct commit *p = parents->item;
parents = parents->next;
- if (!(p->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)) {
- p->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
+ if (!(p->object.flags & STALE)) {
+ p->object.flags |= STALE;
commit_list_insert(p, &list);
}
}
@@ -1034,7 +1034,7 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
struct commit *commit = list->item;
struct commit_list *parents;
int flags = commit->object.flags
- & (PARENT1 | PARENT2 | UNINTERESTING);
+ & (PARENT1 | PARENT2 | STALE);
tmp = list;
list = list->next;
@@ -1042,8 +1042,8 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
if (flags == (PARENT1 | PARENT2)) {
insert_by_date(commit, &result);
- /* Mark parents of a found merge uninteresting */
- flags |= UNINTERESTING;
+ /* Mark parents of a found merge stale */
+ flags |= STALE;
}
parents = commit->parents;
while (parents) {
@@ -1067,7 +1067,7 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
for (tmp = result, list = NULL; tmp; ) {
struct commit *commit = tmp->item;
struct commit_list *next = tmp->next;
- if (commit->object.flags & UNINTERESTING) {
+ if (commit->object.flags & STALE) {
if (list != NULL)
list->next = next;
free(tmp);
@@ -1075,15 +1075,15 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
if (list == NULL)
result = tmp;
list = tmp;
- commit->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
+ commit->object.flags |= STALE;
}
tmp = next;
}
if (cleanup) {
- clear_commit_marks(rev1, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | UNINTERESTING);
- clear_commit_marks(rev2, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | UNINTERESTING);
+ clear_commit_marks(rev1, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | STALE);
+ clear_commit_marks(rev2, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | STALE);
}
return result;
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [POSSIBLE REGRESSION] Spurious revs after patch "revision.c: --full-history fix"
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-07-02 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds, Marco Costalba; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607021012180.12404@g5.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:
> Gaah. Does this trivial patch fix it for you?
>
> It had the wrong test for whether a commit was a merge.
Gaah indeed -- I did not notice the logic error when I picked it
up either, sorry.
> diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
> index 1cf6276..880fb7b 100644
> --- a/revision.c
> +++ b/revision.c
> @@ -997,7 +997,7 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_i
> if (!revs->parents)
> continue;
> /* non-merge - always ignore it */
> - if (commit->parents && !commit->parents->next)
> + if (!commit->parents || !commit->parents->next)
> continue;
> }
> if (revs->parents)
For a casual reader who is curious, the reason it matters to
treat the "root" commit sanely in this example is because with
the --remove-empty option the commits that add the specified
paths are already made into "fake" root commits when the above
function sees them (done in try_to_simplify_commit()).
Thanks, Linus and Marco.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Rene Scharfe @ 2006-07-02 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0607020935460.12404@g5.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds schrieb:
>
> On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Rene Scharfe wrote:
>> Due to popular request ;-), change get_merge_bases() to be able to
>> clean up after itself if needed by adding a cleanup parameter.
>
> Btw, I think the symmetric thing is still wrong.
>
> Try this:
>
> git rev-list ^HEAD~1 HEAD...HEAD~2
>
> which _should_ return just HEAD ("HEAD...HEAD~2" should basically expand
> into "HEAD HEAD~2 ^HEAD~2")
>
> I haven't actually tested your patch, but I think it returns HEAD and
> HEAD~1.
>
> The reason? You clear UNINTERESTING as part of clear_commit_marks(), so
> HEAD~1, which was marked thus by the user, gets cleared of its mark as
> part of the get_merge_bases() invocation.
>
> I suspect the only way to fix that is to make "get_merge_bases()" not use
> UNINTERESTING at all, but instead just explicitly use something like
No and yes. Patch 1 in the 3+1 series changes the flags used in
commit.c to not conflict with the ones in revision.h[*]. So we have two
different UNINTERESTINGs, and get_merge_bases() doesn't mess up the
show/no-show markings.
René
[*] That fix was the one which reportedly made Dscho break a table.
Sorry for that by the way. :-P
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [POOL] Who likes running Git without make install?
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2006-07-02 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Petr Baudis; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20060702113057.GF29115@pasky.or.cz>
Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:
> Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 02:05:46AM CEST, I got a letter
> where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> said that...
>> That's fixed in ancient past in git timescale. Why are you
>> bringing it up again? ;-)
>
> Because, it is, well, not fixed? ;-) (Apparently.)
That response is about "Worse yet, the order is wrong -- ah you
are right" exchange, not about in-place execution.
>> Well, for a quick test to see if I haven't broken anything, I
>> use a new shell and do ". ./+denv" in my git repository where
>> that file has something like this:
>>
>> $ cat ./+denv
>> :
>>
>> GIT_EXEC_PATH=`pwd`
>> PATH=`pwd`:/usr/bin:/bin
>>
>> export GIT_EXEC_PATH PATH
>>
>> So to a certain degree, yes I do care.
>
> But it is currently broken:
I know. The scriptlet needs to muck with PERL5LIB too.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [POSSIBLE REGRESSION] Spurious revs after patch "revision.c: --full-history fix"
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-07-02 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marco Costalba; +Cc: junkio, git
In-Reply-To: <e5bfff550607020519k6007f41bne34d10c0e919f3c8@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Marco Costalba wrote:
>
> What it seems is that with --parents option two more spurious revs
> are printed out. This revs have nothing to do with builtin-add.c, the
> file is newer then both of them.
Gaah. Does this trivial patch fix it for you?
It had the wrong test for whether a commit was a merge. What it did was to
say that a non-merge has exactly one parent (which sounds almost right),
but the fact is, initial trees have no parent at all, but they're
obviously not merges.
So the test for non-merge should be "!parents || !parents->next", not
"parents && !parents->next".
Linus
----
diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index 1cf6276..880fb7b 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -997,7 +997,7 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_i
if (!revs->parents)
continue;
/* non-merge - always ignore it */
- if (commit->parents && !commit->parents->next)
+ if (!commit->parents || !commit->parents->next)
continue;
}
if (revs->parents)
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2006-07-02 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rene Scharfe; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git, Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <20060702094938.GA10944@lsrfire.ath.cx>
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Rene Scharfe wrote:
>
> Due to popular request ;-), change get_merge_bases() to be able to
> clean up after itself if needed by adding a cleanup parameter.
Btw, I think the symmetric thing is still wrong.
Try this:
git rev-list ^HEAD~1 HEAD...HEAD~2
which _should_ return just HEAD ("HEAD...HEAD~2" should basically expand
into "HEAD HEAD~2 ^HEAD~2")
I haven't actually tested your patch, but I think it returns HEAD and
HEAD~1.
The reason? You clear UNINTERESTING as part of clear_commit_marks(), so
HEAD~1, which was marked thus by the user, gets cleared of its mark as
part of the get_merge_bases() invocation.
I suspect the only way to fix that is to make "get_merge_bases()" not use
UNINTERESTING at all, but instead just explicitly use something like
(obj.flags & (LEFT | RIGHT)) == (LEFT | RIGHT)
instead.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox