Re: [PATCH] graph API: fix bug in graph_is_interesting()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:25:49PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > When simplify_commit() logic (now called get_comit_action()) decides to
> > show this commit because revs->show_all was specified, we did not rewrite
> > its parents, but now we will?
> 
> That is, here is what I meant...
> 
> -	if (action == commit_show && revs->prune && revs->dense && want_ancestry(revs)) {
> +	if (action == commit_show &&
> +	    !revs->show_all &&
> +	    revs->prune && revs->dense && want_ancestry(revs)) {
> 
> We may want to add some tests to demonstrate the breakage this fix
> addresses.

Yes, you're right.  Thanks for catching that.  I'll submit a test case
that checks this scenario.

-- 
Adam Simpkins
simpkins@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]