Re: [PATCH 1/3] t9350: point out that refs are not updated correctly

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

 



Sverre Rabbelier wrote:

> That's weird, we have this bit:
>
> +		if (elem->whence != REV_CMD_REV && elem->whence != REV_CMD_RIGHT)
> +			continue;
>
> If I understand correctly that should cause it to only output revs
> (e.g. 'foo1') and the rhs side of a have..want spec.

If I remember right, '^foo1' is (whence == REV_CMD_REV) with (flags ==
UNINTERESTING).  That's why sequencer.c checks for unadorned revs like
this:

	if (opts->revs->cmdline.nr == 1 &&
	    opts->revs->cmdline.rev->whence == REV_CMD_REV &&
	    opts->revs->no_walk &&
	    !opts->revs->cmdline.rev->flags) {

Maybe

	if (elem->flags & UNINTERESTING)
		continue;
	if (elem->whence == REV_CMD_PARENTS_ONLY)	/* foo^@ */
		continue;

would work well here?  That would handle bizarre cases like "--not
next..master" (and ordinary cases like "master...next") better, by
focusing on the semantics instead of syntax.
--
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]