On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> * ab/grep-preparatory-cleanup (2017-05-12) 15 commits >>> - grep: add tests to fix blind spots with \0 patterns >>> - grep: prepare for testing binary regexes containing rx metacharacters >>> - SQUASH??? >>> - grep: add a test helper function for less verbose -f \0 tests >>> - grep: add tests for grep pattern types being passed to submodules >>> - grep: amend submodule recursion test for regex engine testing >>> - grep: add tests for --threads=N and grep.threads >>> - SQUASH??? >>> - grep: change non-ASCII -i test to stop using --debug >>> - grep: add a test for backreferences in PCRE patterns >>> - grep: add a test asserting that --perl-regexp dies when !PCRE >>> - log: add exhaustive tests for pattern style options & config >>> - test-lib: rename the LIBPCRE prerequisite to PCRE >>> - grep & rev-list doc: stop promising libpcre for --perl-regexp >>> - Makefile & configure: reword inaccurate comment about PCRE >>> >>> (what is queued here is only the early part of a larger series) >> >> What's the reason for only queuing it up to this point? > > No particular reason other than there is only so many hours in a day > and running out of time reading and queuing patches. Makes sense, just wondering if I should send the full thing as a v2 or split it up. I'll just send the full thing. >>> * ab/compat-regex-update (2017-05-12) 3 commits >>> - DONTMERGE compat/regex: make it compile with -Werror=int-to-pointer-cast >>> - compat/regex: update the gawk regex engine from upstream >>> - compat/regex: add a README with a maintenance guide >>> >>> Update compat/regex we borrowed from gawk. It seems that some >>> customizations we made to the older one were dropped by mistake. >> >> Do you prefer that I pick up JS's "compat/regex: fix compilation on >> Windows" patch & re-send, or for you to add that on top after that >> discussion is resolved? > > The tip one is what I did only to see if that is the only reason why > Windows build is failing, without knowing Dscho did essentially the > same one hours before. I'd prefer to drop it myself, and ask you > and Dscho to work the solution out, as I am farther than Dscho to > the machinery that can be used to validate the fix ;-) *Nod* will re-submit a version that works & incorporates that fix.