Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2016, #05; Thu, 16)

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

 





On 22/06/16 23:09, Joey Hess wrote:
Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
There is a conflict in pu:
"jh/clean-smudge-annex" does not work together with "tb/convert-peek-in-index"

(And currently pu didn't compile)
I'm sending a v4 of jh/clean-smudge-annex that is rebased on top of
tb/convert-peek-in-index to fix this.

(I will hopefully be able to do a separate review of the smudge/clean patch)
Would be appreciated. It'll be 2 weeks until I can work on this any more.

(And joeyh@xxxxxxxxxx is not reachable from web.de)
I'd like to fix whatever's broken; you could send details out of band to
joeyhess@xxxxxxxxx

Currently there is one comment:
The (new) usage of assert() in sha1_file.c:
  assert(would_convert_to_git_filter_fd(path));

The thing is that we need to check the file system to find .gitatttibutes,
even if we just did it 1 nanosecond ago.

So the .gitattributes is done 3 times:
-1 would_convert_to_git_filter_fd(
-2 assert(would_convert_to_git_filter_fd(path));
-3 convert.c/convert_to_git_filter_fd()

The only situation where this could be useful is when the .gitattributes
change between -1 and -2,
but then they would have changed between -1 and -3, and convert.c
will die().

Does it make sense to remove -2 ?


--
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]