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]

 



On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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.

I know there was a reason why using UNINTERESTING didn't work
(otherwise we could've used that to start with, instead of needing
Junio's whence solution). I think all refs ended up being marked as
UNINTERESTING or somesuch.

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier
--
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]