* Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes)
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-11-01 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds
Cc: git, James Bottomley, Jeff Garzik, Andrew Morton, linux-ide, LKML
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx_rAA6TJkZn1Zvu6u9UjxnmTVt0HpMnvaE_q9Sx-jzPg@mail.gmail.com>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> Having thought about it, I'm also not convinced I really want to
> pollute the "git log" output with information that realistically
> almost nobody cares about. The primary use is just for the person who
> pulls things to verify it, after that the information is largely stale
> and almost certain to never be interesting to anybody ever again. It's
> *theoretically* useful if somebody wants to go back and re-verify, but
> at the same time that really isn't expected to be the common case.
> ...
> So I'm wondering if we want to save it at all. it's quite possible
> that realistically speaking "google the mailing list archives" is the
> *right* way to look up the signature if it is ever needed later.
I'd rather want to hear opinions from people who base their work on public
kernels (e.g. distros, and companies who roll their own prod kernels), on
that.
But my gut feeling is that "usually hidden not to disturb normal users,
but is cast in stone in the history and cannot be lost" strikes the right
balance. Both your "next merge commit records the signature together with
the largely useless merge summary cruft but everybody learned to ignore it
with 'log --no-merges' anyway so it does not hurt to have it there" and
the commit signature topic from the next branch [*1*] that puts the
signature in the object header and teaches '--show-signature' option to
the log family to show it share this property.
> Maybe just verifying the email message (with the suggested kind of
> change to "git request-pull") is actually the right approach. And what
> I should do is to just wrap my "git pull" in some script that I can
> just cut-and-paste the gpg-signed thing into, and which just does the
> "gpg --verify" on it, and then does the "git pull" after that.
>
> Because in many ways, "git request-pull" is when you do want to sign
> stuff. A developer might well want to push out his stuff for some
> random internal testing (linux-next, for example), and then only later
> decide "Ok, it was all good, now I want to make it 'official' and ask
> Linus to pull it", and sign it at *that* time, rather than when
> actually pushing it out.
>
> And I suspect signing the pull request fits better into peoples
> existing workflow anyway - sending out the email to ask the maintainer
> to pull really is the "special event", rather than pushing out the
> code itself.
"I can silently push and re-push or even rewind-and-then-push until I
officially send pull-request out" fits well with the "defer the decision
as much as possible" model Git takes in general, and I find certain
attractiveness in it.
But on the other hand, in many ways, publishing your commit to the outside
world, not necessarily for getting pulled into the final destination
(i.e. your tree) but merely for other people to try it out, is the point
of no return (aka "don't rewind or rebase once you publish"). "pushing
out" might be less special than "please pull", but it still is special.
Also there is nothing lost if you sign commits whenever you push them
out.
[Footnote]
*1* Here are three examples on the same commit that is signed for
illustration.
------------------------------------------------
$ git show -s pu
commit c9d870fceac787fdb1c1c43b136c1a94ab2ab005
Merge: 8367c51 71f45ee
Author: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon Oct 31 20:06:58 2011 -0700
Merge branch 'jc/stream-to-pack' into pu
* jc/stream-to-pack:
Bulk check-in
finish_tmp_packfile(): a helper function
create_tmp_packfile(): a helper function
write_pack_header(): a helper function
------------------------------------------------
$ git show -s --show-signature pu
commit c9d870fceac787fdb1c1c43b136c1a94ab2ab005
gpg: Signature made Mon 31 Oct 2011 08:07:04 PM PDT using RSA key ID 96AFE6CB
gpg: Good signature from "Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>"
gpg: aka "Junio C Hamano <junio@pobox.com>"
gpg: aka "Junio C Hamano <jch@google.com>"
Merge: 8367c51 71f45ee
Author: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon Oct 31 20:06:58 2011 -0700
Merge branch 'jc/stream-to-pack' into pu
* jc/stream-to-pack:
Bulk check-in
finish_tmp_packfile(): a helper function
create_tmp_packfile(): a helper function
write_pack_header(): a helper function
------------------------------------------------
$ git cat-file commit pu
tree 9add290d468800c3c51ff68fedfb3d16427872ff
parent 8367c51becc5a225b9a192348b7d7c615fb6d250
parent 71f45eeb8278670257bea83620f7d3eac174eee7
author Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 1320116818 -0700
committer Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 1320116824 -0700
gpgsig -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
gpgsig Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
gpgsig
gpgsig ...
gpgsig =c62U
gpgsig -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge branch 'jc/stream-to-pack' into pu
* jc/stream-to-pack:
Bulk check-in
finish_tmp_packfile(): a helper function
create_tmp_packfile(): a helper function
write_pack_header(): a helper function
------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: t5800-*.sh: Intermittent test failures
From: Alex Riesen @ 2011-11-01 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramsay Jones
Cc: Jeff King, Junio C Hamano, Sverre Rabbelier, GIT Mailing-list,
Jonathan Nieder
In-Reply-To: <4E6D089C.4090006@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 21:14, Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> ... these hangs *are* the failures of which I speak! Yes, the script
> doesn't get to declare a failure, but AFAIAC a hanging test (and it
> isn't the same test # each time) is a failing test. :-D
Was there any outcome of this discussion? I'm asking because I
can reproduce this very reliably on a little server here.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: t5800-*.sh: Intermittent test failures
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-11-01 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Riesen
Cc: Ramsay Jones, Jeff King, Sverre Rabbelier, GIT Mailing-list,
Jonathan Nieder
In-Reply-To: <CALxABCbnZp-y0Fqzoa=Ab92P+hsT7hs3nXZsnA=ph3yGfkXhdA@mail.gmail.com>
Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 21:14, Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> ... these hangs *are* the failures of which I speak! Yes, the script
>> doesn't get to declare a failure, but AFAIAC a hanging test (and it
>> isn't the same test # each time) is a failing test. :-D
>
> Was there any outcome of this discussion? I'm asking because I
> can reproduce this very reliably on a little server here.
I do remember this discussion and recall seeing _no_ outcome.
I did see the hang myself once or twice but did not and do not have a
reliable reproduction. I have been waiting for somebody to raise the issue
again ;-).
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] name-hash.c: always initialize dir_next pointer
From: Johannes Sixt @ 2011-11-01 22:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git, Junio C Hamano
Test t2021-checkout-overwrite.sh reveals a segfault in 'git add' on a
case-insensitive file system when git is compiled with XMALLOC_POISON
defined. The reason is that 2548183b (fix phantom untracked files when
core.ignorecase is set) added a new member dir_next to struct cache_entry,
but forgot to initialize it in all cases.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
---
You can also insert git config core.ignorecase true before the first
test script in t2021 to see the segfault.
I actually found the crash with an MSVC debug build, which has something
like XMALLOC_POISON built-in.
name-hash.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/name-hash.c b/name-hash.c
index 225dd76..d8d25c2 100644
--- a/name-hash.c
+++ b/name-hash.c
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static void hash_index_entry(struct index_state *istate, struct cache_entry *ce)
if (ce->ce_flags & CE_HASHED)
return;
ce->ce_flags |= CE_HASHED;
- ce->next = NULL;
+ ce->next = ce->dir_next = NULL;
hash = hash_name(ce->name, ce_namelen(ce));
pos = insert_hash(hash, ce, &istate->name_hash);
if (pos) {
--
1.7.7.1.586.ga0958b
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH] name-hash.c: always initialize dir_next pointer
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-11-01 22:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Sixt; +Cc: Jeff King, git
In-Reply-To: <4EB070D2.4040709@kdbg.org>
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Re: [PATCHv2] Compile fix for MSVC
From: Vincent van Ravesteijn @ 2011-11-01 22:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin
Cc: ramsay, msysgit, Karsten Blees, git, Junio C Hamano,
Erik Faye-Lund
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.1111011332400.32316@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 414 bytes --]
> Maybe if someone donates Jenkins resources, we could make an automatic
> branch in the future that has git.sln in it (similar to the 'html' branch
> in git.git).
>
As long as this means to just run a not so complicated perl script, this
Could even be done in a commit hook.
Just another question. How does the (msys)git community feel about adding
CMake support ? I can probably do that quite easily.
Vincent
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 481 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes)
From: Ted Ts'o @ 2011-11-01 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds
Cc: Junio C Hamano, git, James Bottomley, Jeff Garzik, Andrew Morton,
linux-ide, LKML
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx_rAA6TJkZn1Zvu6u9UjxnmTVt0HpMnvaE_q9Sx-jzPg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:21:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So I'm wondering if we want to save it at all. it's quite possible
> that realistically speaking "google the mailing list archives" is the
> *right* way to look up the signature if it is ever needed later.
Given the number of trees that you merge in every merge window (never
mind over an entire release), I don't think "google the mailing list
archives" is going to scale. Finding some way to keep it along with
the merge window seems the right thing. I agree that it should hidden
normally, but that's a UI display issue. Heck, we could just hide
after the terminating NULL in the commit description, per a discussion
on the git list 2-3 weeks ago. :-)
> Because in many ways, "git request-pull" is when you do want to sign
> stuff. A developer might well want to push out his stuff for some
> random internal testing (linux-next, for example), and then only later
> decide "Ok, it was all good, now I want to make it 'official' and ask
> Linus to pull it", and sign it at *that* time, rather than when
> actually pushing it out.
Sure, the signed content should be buried in the commit that it
describes. Whether we carry it in an emphemeral tag or in the git
request-pull is not really important from a security perspective. The
tag is nicer simply because the person doing the pull won't need to
cut and paste the signature information.
One approach which might work is if git request-pull sends the e-mail
message with the git shortlog and diffstat, *and* an MIME attachment
that contained all of the necessary information. The maintainer would
then save the attachment, and feed it to git, which will display the
git shortlog and diffstat, ask for confirmation, and then embed the
digital signature into the merge commit.
The only problem with that is (a) you'd have to get over your hatred
of attachment (but if you're using Gmail hopefully that's relative
convenient :-), and (b) LKML list filter would have to be taught to
tolerate git-generated attachments.
- Ted
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] name-hash.c: always initialize dir_next pointer
From: Jeff King @ 2011-11-01 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Sixt; +Cc: git, Junio C Hamano
In-Reply-To: <4EB070D2.4040709@kdbg.org>
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 11:21:06PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Test t2021-checkout-overwrite.sh reveals a segfault in 'git add' on a
> case-insensitive file system when git is compiled with XMALLOC_POISON
> defined. The reason is that 2548183b (fix phantom untracked files when
> core.ignorecase is set) added a new member dir_next to struct cache_entry,
> but forgot to initialize it in all cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
> ---
> You can also insert git config core.ignorecase true before the first
> test script in t2021 to see the segfault.
Yikes, thanks.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [msysGit] Re: [PATCHv2] Compile fix for MSVC
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2011-11-01 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vincent van Ravesteijn
Cc: ramsay, msysgit, Karsten Blees, git, Junio C Hamano,
Erik Faye-Lund
In-Reply-To: <CAAH6HY8WfOQQ4g54y7mriq6BKoJCWYsVPrQUTMndqpKdniLAtw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> > Maybe if someone donates Jenkins resources, we could make an automatic
> > branch in the future that has git.sln in it (similar to the 'html'
> > branch in git.git).
>
> As long as this means to just run a not so complicated perl script, this
> Could even be done in a commit hook.
I actually was thinking about something automatic which does not require
any of the busy msysGit developers to do something manual every once in a
while.
> Just another question. How does the (msys)git community feel about
> adding CMake support ? I can probably do that quite easily.
There was somebody who strongly favored CMake over any other solution but
was not willing to maintain it in the long run (also, I have to admit that
I have had quite a few problems with CMake, but maybe I am just pampered
by projects that Just Compile...)
Ciao,
Johannes
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [msysGit] Re: [PATCHv2] Compile fix for MSVC
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2011-11-01 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Erik Faye-Lund
Cc: Junio C Hamano, Vincent van Ravesteijn, git, ramsay, msysgit,
Karsten Blees
In-Reply-To: <CABPQNSb07fRUCqPCX7JbfGW_55etZZtPyP=yuCKV9wJeNP-iQw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi kusma,
On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > Maybe if someone donates Jenkins resources, we could make an automatic
> > branch in the future that has git.sln in it (similar to the 'html'
> > branch in git.git).
>
> CloudBees seems to have some kind of a free Jenkins service. Perhaps
> it's sufficient? http://www.cloudbees.com/dev-pricing.cb
Looks quite cool, but keep in mind: they only have Linux build machines.
We'd need to pimp up our cross-platform compiling capabilities; WINE will
most likely not be good enough (we'd only have 2000 minutes per month).
Ciao,
Dscho
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: t5800-*.sh: Intermittent test failures
From: Alex Riesen @ 2011-11-01 23:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Ramsay Jones, Jeff King, Sverre Rabbelier, GIT Mailing-list,
Jonathan Nieder
In-Reply-To: <7vfwi7lc54.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 23:18, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 21:14, Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> ... these hangs *are* the failures of which I speak! Yes, the script
>>> doesn't get to declare a failure, but AFAIAC a hanging test (and it
>>> isn't the same test # each time) is a failing test. :-D
>>
>> Was there any outcome of this discussion? I'm asking because I
>> can reproduce this very reliably on a little server here.
>
> I do remember this discussion and recall seeing _no_ outcome.
>
> I did see the hang myself once or twice but did not and do not have a
> reliable reproduction. I have been waiting for somebody to raise the issue
> again ;-).
>
I think I managed to bisect it (between 1.7.6 and 1.7.7):
$ git bisect start v1.7.7 v1.7.6
...
$ git bisect good
a515ebe9f1ac9bc248c12a291dc008570de505ca is the first bad commit
commit a515ebe9f1ac9bc248c12a291dc008570de505ca
Author: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Date: Sat Jul 16 15:03:40 2011 +0200
transport-helper: implement marks location as capability
Now that the gitdir location is exported as an environment variable
this can be implemented elegantly without requiring any explicit
flushes nor an ad-hoc exchange of values.
Signed-off-by: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
:100644 100644 1ed7a5651ef5a2320c56856b5a1fe784e178ab23
e9c832bfd3da7db771cc2113027d3e590dc51d59 M git-remote-testgit.py
:100644 100644 0cfc9ae9059ce121b567406d7941b71cd54b961c
74c3122df1835c45a6b621205fb18b4fc89af366 M transport-helper.c
Sadly, I'm going to be able to repeat the test in about 20 hours.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Re: [PATCHv2] Compile fix for MSVC
From: Vincent van Ravesteijn @ 2011-11-01 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin
Cc: ramsay, msysgit, Karsten Blees, git, Junio C Hamano,
Erik Faye-Lund
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.1111011738550.32316@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1342 bytes --]
>
>
> > > Maybe if someone donates Jenkins resources, we could make an automatic
> > > branch in the future that has git.sln in it (similar to the 'html'
> > > branch in git.git).
> >
> > As long as this means to just run a not so complicated perl script, this
> > Could even be done in a commit hook.
>
> I actually was thinking about something automatic which does not require
> any of the busy msysGit developers to do something manual every once in a
> while.
I thought that a commit hook, was something automatic (iff the busy
developers
do commit something once in a while). I guess I can even set this up very
easily
(given push rights, otherwise it will involve manual labor again).
> > Just another question. How does the (msys)git community feel about
> > adding CMake support ? I can probably do that quite easily.
>
> There was somebody who strongly favored CMake over any other solution but
> was not willing to maintain it in the long run (also, I have to admit that
> I have had quite a few problems with CMake, but maybe I am just pampered
> by projects that Just Compile...)
>
The current way of generating a MSVC project is rather outdated, so the
worst
thing that can happen is that you have a different build system which is not
maintained. At least the CMake people will continue to improve on their
side.
Vincent
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2011 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [msysGit] Re: [PATCHv2] Compile fix for MSVC
From: Pat Thoyts @ 2011-11-02 0:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vincent van Ravesteijn
Cc: Johannes Schindelin, ramsay, msysgit, Karsten Blees, git,
Junio C Hamano, Erik Faye-Lund
In-Reply-To: <CAAH6HY8WfOQQ4g54y7mriq6BKoJCWYsVPrQUTMndqpKdniLAtw@mail.gmail.com>
On 1 November 2011 22:32, Vincent van Ravesteijn <vfr@lyx.org> wrote:
>
>> Maybe if someone donates Jenkins resources, we could make an automatic
>> branch in the future that has git.sln in it (similar to the 'html' branch
>> in git.git).
>>
>
> As long as this means to just run a not so complicated perl script, this
> Could even be done in a commit hook.
>
> Just another question. How does the (msys)git community feel about adding
> CMake support ? I can probably do that quite easily.
>
> Vincent
>
-1. We have a make. We don't need two of them.
^ permalink raw reply
* [ANNOUNCE] Git 1.7.7.2
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-11-02 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: Linux Kernel
The latest maintenance release Git 1.7.7.2 is available.
The release tarballs are found at:
http://code.google.com/p/git-core/downloads/list
and their SHA-1 checksums are:
be5be63fbab63517fcccf5c876749c61b0019d14 git-1.7.7.2.tar.gz
8f0eb6f1150ea8c6922343aa4c3ee6cf37e8a091 git-htmldocs-1.7.7.2.tar.gz
07e0887315224ac83c61ed60602c345c32a5d658 git-manpages-1.7.7.2.tar.gz
Also the following public repositories all have a copy of the v1.7.7.2
tag and the maint branch that the tag points at:
url = git://repo.or.cz/alt-git.git
url = https://code.google.com/p/git-core/
url = git://git.sourceforge.jp/gitroot/git-core/git.git
url = git://git-core.git.sourceforge.net/gitroot/git-core/git-core
url = https://github.com/gitster/git
Git v1.7.7.2 Release Notes
==========================
Fixes since v1.7.7.1
--------------------
* We used to drop error messages from libcurl on certain kinds of
errors.
* Error report from smart HTTP transport, when the connection was
broken in the middle of a transfer, showed a useless message on
a corrupt packet.
* "git fetch --prune" was unsafe when used with refspecs from the
command line.
* The attribute mechanism did not use case insensitive match when
core.ignorecase was set.
* "git bisect" did not notice when it failed to update the working tree
to the next commit to be tested.
* "git config --bool --get-regexp" failed to separate the variable name
and its value "true" when the variable is defined without "= true".
* "git remote rename $a $b" were not careful to match the remote name
against $a (i.e. source side of the remote nickname).
* "git mergetool" did not use its arguments as pathspec, but as a path to
the file that may not even have any conflict.
* "git diff --[num]stat" used to use the number of lines of context
different from the default, potentially giving different results from
"git diff | diffstat" and confusing the users.
* "git pull" and "git rebase" did not work well even when GIT_WORK_TREE is
set correctly with GIT_DIR if the current directory is outside the working
tree.
* "git send-email" did not honor the configured hostname when restarting
the HELO/EHLO exchange after switching TLS on.
* "gitweb" used to produce a non-working link while showing the contents
of a blob, when JavaScript actions are enabled.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Changes since v1.7.7.1 are as follows:
Brandon Casey (4):
attr.c: avoid inappropriate access to strbuf "buf" member
cleanup: use internal memory allocation wrapper functions everywhere
builtin/mv.c: plug miniscule memory leak
attr.c: respect core.ignorecase when matching attribute patterns
Carlos Martín Nieto (6):
Remove 'working copy' from the documentation and C code
fetch: free all the additional refspecs
t5510: add tests for fetch --prune
remote: separate out the remote_find_tracking logic into query_refspecs
fetch: honor the user-provided refspecs when pruning refs
fetch: treat --tags like refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* when pruning
Christian Couder (1):
bisect: fix exiting when checkout failed in bisect_start()
Haitao Li (1):
date.c: Support iso8601 timezone formats
Jakub Narebski (1):
gitweb: Strip non-printable characters from syntax highlighter output
Jeff King (8):
add sha1_array API docs
quote.h: fix bogus comment
refactor argv_array into generic code
quote: provide sq_dequote_to_argv_array
bisect: use argv_array API
checkout: use argv_array API
run_hook: use argv_array API
pull,rebase: handle GIT_WORK_TREE better
Jim Meyering (1):
make the sample pre-commit hook script reject names with newlines, too
Jonathan Nieder (2):
http: remove extra newline in error message
http: avoid empty error messages for some curl errors
Jonathon Mah (1):
mergetool: Use args as pathspec to unmerged files
Junio C Hamano (5):
refactor run_receive_hook()
diff: teach --stat/--numstat to honor -U$num
mergetool: no longer need to save standard input
attr: read core.attributesfile from git_default_core_config
Git 1.7.7.2
Martin von Zweigbergk (4):
remote: write correct fetch spec when renaming remote 'remote'
remote: "rename o foo" should not rename ref "origin/bar"
remote rename: warn when refspec was not updated
remote: only update remote-tracking branch if updating refspec
Matthew Daley (1):
send-email: Honour SMTP domain when using TLS
Michael Haggerty (1):
notes_merge_commit(): do not pass temporary buffer to other function
Michael J Gruber (3):
unpack-trees: print "Aborting" to stderr
git-read-tree.txt: language and typography fixes
git-read-tree.txt: correct sparse-checkout and skip-worktree description
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy (2):
git-read-tree.txt: update sparse checkout examples
Reindent closing bracket using tab instead of spaces
Pat Thoyts (1):
t7511: avoid use of reserved filename on Windows.
Peter Stuge (1):
gitweb: Fix links to lines in blobs when javascript-actions are enabled
Ramsay Allan Jones (1):
t9159-*.sh: skip for mergeinfo test for svn <= 1.4
René Scharfe (1):
read-cache.c: fix index memory allocation
Richard Hartmann (1):
clone: Quote user supplied path in a single quote pair
Shawn O. Pearce (1):
remote-curl: Fix warning after HTTP failure
Stefan Naewe (1):
Documentation/git-update-index: refer to 'ls-files'
Thomas Rast (1):
Documentation: basic configuration of notes.rewriteRef
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Git is exploding
From: Miles Bader @ 2011-11-02 4:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthieu Moy; +Cc: Øyvind A. Holm, git
In-Reply-To: <vpqfwi8tary.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:
> The recent rise is essentially due to the git-core package renamed to
> git, and people doing updates:
The renaming would obviously explain the extreme initial steepness of
the rise, but it shouldn't have much effect on the absolute values or
the more recent numbers.
[Look at git-core+git, basically it makes the initial part of the
graph fill in a bit, getting rid of the weird kink and making it more
smoothly exponential but doesn't really change the conclusion.]
Probably the main distortion is just the fact that it counts Debian
users ... subversion has a lot of stodgy corporate users etc that are
unlikely to use Debian! :]
--Miles
--
Twice, adv. Once too often.
^ permalink raw reply
* Antw: Re: Q: "git diff" using tag names
From: Ulrich Windl @ 2011-11-02 7:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexey Shumkin; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20111028165943.2cc8253d@ashu.dyn.rarus.ru>
Hello Alexey,
thank you very much for your reply. I felt I did something wrong, but couldn't find out what it was. Actually it turned out that I had just mistyped one tag name.
Also it seems that both syntaxes work:
git diff v0.4..v0.5
git diff v0.4 v0.5
The question is: How does git disambiguate between tag names, commits and file names? (All may start with a letter)
This seems to work automagically, and I was desparately looking for an option like "--" to separate revisions from file names. I found "SPECIFYING REVISIONS" in git-rev-parse(1), so you don't really have to answer.
Regards,
Ulrich
>>> Alexey Shumkin <Alex.Crezoff@gmail.com> schrieb am 28.10.2011 um 14:59 in
Nachricht <20111028165943.2cc8253d@ashu.dyn.rarus.ru>:
> Tag is a pointer to a commit (if to say simply)
>
> e.g. in my repo
> $ git show-ref --tags --abbrev=7
> -->8--
> 676f194 refs/tags/v2.6.7
> b23c481 refs/tags/v2.6.8
> -->8--
>
> so
>
> $ git diff v2.6.7..v2.6.8
> is equivalent to
> $ git diff 676f194..b23c481
>
> etc
> > Hi,
> >
> > when using a somewhat older git (of SLES11 SP1 SDK), I could not find
> > a way to "git diff" between two tag names; I can only diff between
> > two commit numbers. I can display a changeset using "git show", but
> > that's not what I wanted. Is it possible to get the diff I want using
> > older versions, and is such a feature implemented in the current
> > version? If so, since when?
> >
> > As I'm not subscribed to the list, I'd appreciate CC'ed replies.
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Greeting
> > Ulrich
> >
> >
>
>
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [msysGit] Re: [PATCHv2] Compile fix for MSVC
From: Vincent van Ravesteijn @ 2011-11-02 7:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pat Thoyts
Cc: Johannes Schindelin, ramsay, msysgit, Karsten Blees, git,
Junio C Hamano, Erik Faye-Lund
In-Reply-To: <CABNJ2G+Km4wob4_uNYQLkQUL61-ohZg5cL2yu7j1cngoL9W7Cw@mail.gmail.com>
Op 2-11-2011 1:48, Pat Thoyts schreef:
> On 1 November 2011 22:32, Vincent van Ravesteijn<vfr@lyx.org> wrote:
>>> Maybe if someone donates Jenkins resources, we could make an automatic
>>> branch in the future that has git.sln in it (similar to the 'html' branch
>>> in git.git).
>>>
>> As long as this means to just run a not so complicated perl script, this
>> Could even be done in a commit hook.
>>
>> Just another question. How does the (msys)git community feel about adding
>> CMake support ? I can probably do that quite easily.
>>
>> Vincent
>>
> -1. We have a make. We don't need two of them.
Make won't offer anything if you want to support MSVC. So, if you want
to support MSVC, there has to be some sort of alternative.
Vincent
^ permalink raw reply
* Antw: Re: Q: "git diff" using tag names
From: Ulrich Windl @ 2011-11-02 7:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Narebski; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <m3aa8l5k1y.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
>>> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> schrieb am 28.10.2011 um 15:21 in Nachricht
<m3aa8l5k1y.fsf@localhost.localdomain>:
> "Ulrich Windl" <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> writes:
>
> > When using a somewhat older git (of SLES11 SP1 SDK),
>
> Nb. you can check version of git with "git --version".
Hi!
For the records, it's "1.6.0.2"...
>
> > I could not
> > find a way to "git diff" between two tag names; I can only diff
> > between two commit numbers. I can display a changeset using "git
> > show", but that's not what I wanted.
> >
> > Is it possible to get the diff I want using older versions, and is
> > such a feature implemented in the current version? If so, since
> > when?
>
> From the very beginning in Git you can use tag name where you need
> commit identifier; Git would use commit that tag points to (will
> dereference or peel a tag).
As said before, I was confused by the simplicity: I was looking for an option to specify revisions (as opposed to file names), like "-r" for RCS, but found none. To make things complicated, I had mistyped one tag name without noticing, so I failed to diff, making me think that tag names won't work the way they actually do.
Sorry, and thanks to everybody who helped!
Ulrich
>
> That is not possible in some [censored] version control systems; I am
> looking at you, Subversion!
>
>
> So if you can do
>
> $ git show v0.9
> $ git show v1.0
>
> you can also do
>
> $ git diff v0.9 v1.0
>
> and
>
> $ git log v0.9..v1.0
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] http.c: Use curl_multi_fdset to select on curl fds instead of just sleeping
From: Mika Fischer @ 2011-11-02 8:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Stenberg; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <CAOs=hR+YuF+HP0n0132Ktm3RdeWsnVp0Bgt89LNn+VyT6W0mcw@mail.gmail.com>
>> Calling select() with max_fd+1 (== 0) will then not be appreciated by all
>> implementations of select() so that case should probably also be covered by
>> the 50ms sleep approach...
>
> Actually, the 50ms sleep was also implemented using select(0, ...)
> before the patch. I tried to keep the previous behavior when curl does
> not give us any information.
> I assumed that the select(0, ...) was some portable way to sleep with
> microsecond granularity.
Upon a bit of research, it seems that select(0, ...) is indeed quite
commonly used. So I'd just keep it as it was unless you know of a
problem it causes.
Since I'm new here, I don't really know what the next steps are for
the patch, should I just wait? Or send it directly to someone?
Best,
Mika
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: git sticker svg
From: Michael J Gruber @ 2011-11-02 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <20111101211643.GA12768@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King venit, vidit, dixit 01.11.2011 22:16:
> If you were at the GSoC mentor summit or the GitTogether last week, you
> may seen Git stickers floating around. I printed 500, thinking there
> would be some leftovers to distribute afterwards. But either git is very
> popular, or somebody decided to re-wallpaper their bedroom, because we
> ran out.
>
> In case anybody wants to make their own git sticker (or whatever), I'm
> providing the SVG that I sent to the printer. I ordered 2"x4" stickers,
> but it's scalable, you should be able to do any size.
>
> Credit where credit is due:
>
> The logo is shamelessly stolen from one Sam Vilain made for GitTogether
> t-shirts in 2008. It's really just the "---/+++" logo done in FreeMono
> with a few pretty colors and outlines. I have no idea who did the
> original "---/+++" logo. It's awesome, but I couldn't find a nice
> scalable version, hence this.
Yeah, git has been G-+ long before G+ ;)
I do prefer the rotated, vertically stacked +-G though (with + <-> t, -
<-> i, G <-> 3/4-circle with arrow). Good thing we don't have to argue
about an "official" logo...
Michael
^ permalink raw reply
* [RFC/PATCH] http-push: don't always prompt for password (Was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git 1.7.8.rc0)
From: Stefan Näwe @ 2011-11-02 8:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King
In-Reply-To: <7vmxcfn23i.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Am 01.11.2011 19:12, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>
> There are only handful of commits that even remotely touch http related
> codepath between v1.7.7 and v1.7.8-rc0:
>
> * deba493 http_init: accept separate URL parameter
>
> This could change the URL string given to http_auth_init().
>
> * 070b4dd http: use hostname in credential description
>
> This only changes the prompt string; as far as I understand it, the
> condition the password is prompted in the callsites of git_getpass()
> has not changed.
>
> * 6cdf022 remote-curl: Fix warning after HTTP failure
> * be22d92 http: avoid empty error messages for some curl errors
> * 8abc508 http: remove extra newline in error message
> * 8d677ed http: retry authentication failures for all http requests
> * 28d0c10 remote-curl: don't retry auth failures with dumb protocol
>
> These shouldn't affect anything wrt prompting, unless you are somehow
> internally reauthenticating.
>
> Could you try reverting deba493 and retest, and then if the behaviour is
> the same "need ENTER", further revert 070b4dd and retest?
I did a little more testing.
This WIP makes it work for me (i.e. "need ENTER" is gone, works with
and without .netrc, with 'https://host/repo.git' and
'https://user@host...' URL). Needs testing, of course.
---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---
diff --git a/http.c b/http.c
index a4bc770..008ad72 100644
--- a/http.c
+++ b/http.c
@@ -279,8 +279,6 @@ static CURL *get_curl_handle(void)
curl_easy_setopt(result, CURLOPT_HTTPAUTH, CURLAUTH_ANY);
#endif
- init_curl_http_auth(result);
-
if (ssl_cert != NULL)
curl_easy_setopt(result, CURLOPT_SSLCERT, ssl_cert);
if (has_cert_password())
@@ -846,7 +844,7 @@ static int http_request(const char *url, void *result, int target, int options)
else if (missing_target(&results))
ret = HTTP_MISSING_TARGET;
else if (results.http_code == 401) {
- if (user_name) {
+ if (user_name && user_pass) {
ret = HTTP_NOAUTH;
} else {
/*
@@ -855,7 +853,8 @@ static int http_request(const char *url, void *result, int target, int options)
* but that is non-portable. Using git_getpass() can at least be stubbed
* on other platforms with a different implementation if/when necessary.
*/
- user_name = xstrdup(git_getpass_with_description("Username", description));
+ if (!user_name)
+ user_name = xstrdup(git_getpass_with_description("Username", description));
init_curl_http_auth(slot->curl);
ret = HTTP_REAUTH;
}
---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---
Regards,
Stefan
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
/dev/random says: Efficiency takes time! Frugality: who can afford it?
python -c "print '73746566616e2e6e616577654061746c61732d656c656b74726f6e696b2e636f6d'.decode('hex')"
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes)
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2011-11-02 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds
Cc: Junio C Hamano, H. Peter Anvin, git, James Bottomley, Jeff Garzik,
Andrew Morton, linux-ide, LKML
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyKWLUMQFfaeKJKGFPV_7kfOGjf+pSZ1Y8afzkT4OYQ9Q@mail.gmail.com>
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> And the receiving side would just do the "git pull" and
> automatically just get notified that "Yes, this push has been
> signed by key Xyz Abcdef"
If this approach is used then it would be nice to have a .gitconfig
switch to require trusted pulls by default: to not allow doing
non-signed or untrusted pulls accidentally, or for Git to warn in a
visible, hard to miss way if there's a non-signed pull.
This adds social uncertainty (and an element of a silent alarm) to a
realistic attack: the attacker wouldnt know exactly how the puller
checks signed pull requests, it's kept private.
Thanks,
Ingo
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] http.c: Use curl_multi_fdset to select on curl fds instead of just sleeping
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-11-02 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Fischer; +Cc: Daniel Stenberg, git
In-Reply-To: <CAOs=hR+u_MrHK4iNFZj4pLVhZ6-_75YpqN7tqWnSjh+di8Lzxw@mail.gmail.com>
Mika Fischer <mika.fischer@zoopnet.de> writes:
> Since I'm new here, I don't really know what the next steps are for
> the patch, should I just wait? Or send it directly to someone?
Resend to the list for re-evaluation, and then we can take it from there.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: git sticker svg
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2011-11-02 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael J Gruber; +Cc: Jeff King, git
In-Reply-To: <4EB1002A.6010602@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
> I do prefer the rotated, vertically stacked +-G though (with + <-> t, -
> <-> i, G <-> 3/4-circle with arrow). Good thing we don't have to argue
> about an "official" logo...
It somehow reminds me of the OGC logo fiasco, though.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Q: "git diff" using tag names
From: Alexey Shumkin @ 2011-11-02 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ulrich Windl; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <4EB0FFCA020000A100007DE2@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de>
> Hello Alexey,
>
> thank you very much for your reply. I felt I did something wrong, but
> couldn't find out what it was. Actually it turned out that I had just
> mistyped one tag name.
>
> Also it seems that both syntaxes work:
> git diff v0.4..v0.5
> git diff v0.4 v0.5
>
> The question is: How does git disambiguate between tag names, commits
> and file names? (All may start with a letter) This seems to work
> automagically, and I was desparately looking for an option like "--"
> to separate revisions from file names. I found "SPECIFYING REVISIONS"
> in git-rev-parse(1), so you don't really have to answer.
Yes, you found right answer. "--" option separates file names from
"commits' names". but it usually necessary when you have branches or
tags named as some of your files.
E.g. you have file "test" and you name branch "test"
so "git log test" will complain that it cannot understand your
intention to see log of what and will fail
$ git log test
fatal: ambiguous argument 'test': both revision and filename
Use '--' to separate filenames from revisions
$ git log -- test
will show log of file test
$ git log test --
will show log of branch test
> Also it seems that both syntaxes work:
> git diff v0.4..v0.5
> git diff v0.4 v0.5
honestly, I do not know the difference (at the moment :))
may be gurus or manual will help to discover it
>
> Regards,
> Ulrich
>
> >>> Alexey Shumkin <Alex.Crezoff@gmail.com> schrieb am 28.10.2011 um
> >>> 14:59 in
> Nachricht <20111028165943.2cc8253d@ashu.dyn.rarus.ru>:
> > Tag is a pointer to a commit (if to say simply)
> >
> > e.g. in my repo
> > $ git show-ref --tags --abbrev=7
> > -->8--
> > 676f194 refs/tags/v2.6.7
> > b23c481 refs/tags/v2.6.8
> > -->8--
> >
> > so
> >
> > $ git diff v2.6.7..v2.6.8
> > is equivalent to
> > $ git diff 676f194..b23c481
> >
> > etc
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > when using a somewhat older git (of SLES11 SP1 SDK), I could not
> > > find a way to "git diff" between two tag names; I can only diff
> > > between two commit numbers. I can display a changeset using "git
> > > show", but that's not what I wanted. Is it possible to get the
> > > diff I want using older versions, and is such a feature
> > > implemented in the current version? If so, since when?
> > >
> > > As I'm not subscribed to the list, I'd appreciate CC'ed replies.
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > > Greeting
> > > Ulrich
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
^ 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