Re: 'pu' branch for StGIT

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

 



On 2007-08-09 09:24:43 -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:

> On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 09:38 +0200, Karl Hasselström wrote:
>
> > I take it this all means you're actually using my branch? What's
> > your opinion on its usefulness?
>
> Well, I tried it, and then ran a script to update all local
> repositories. It converted everything to "version 3", so I'm sort of
> stuck with it. If the "version 3" code is not committed to the
> mainline StGIT, I'll have to convert my repositories back or even
> re-fetch them.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. :-)

You should be able to do something like

  $ stg applied > .git/patches/branch/applied
  $ stg unapplied > .git/patches/branch/unapplied

and then manually change the version from 3 to 2, and be ready to go.
I haven't tested this, though!

> I have noticed two problems so far, but I cannot tell is they are
> specific to the "pu" branch.
>
> 1) Undead patches.

I saw the same problem today. I haven't had time to look into it, but
I believe it's due to stgit trying to directly modify files under
.git/refs instead of using git-update-ref, which breaks with packed
refs. The DAG patches rely much more on the refs, so the bug is more
severe in that case.

https://gna.org/bugs/?9710

> There is also a file .git/patches/wireless-dev/patchorder, which
> contains "at76_usb".

The patchorder file should be harmless. It's only used to determine
patch order for those cases where the DAG information isn't
sufficient. (That is, for unapplied patches.) It's strictly advisory,
and _not_ used to determine which patches exist.

> I was updating the repository by "stg pull", there were two patches,
> "at76_usb" being first. It couldn't be merged, so I deleted it. I
> deleted the other patch as well, since I new it was applied
> upstream. After another "stg pull" at76_usb became "undead".

Until this is fixed, you can use git-show-ref and git-update-ref to
manually delete the offending ref. That fixed the problem for me.

> 2) Invisible branches.

I haven't seen this problem at all -- in my repositories, "stg branch
-l" just works. Will try to reproduce (hopefully tonight). Do you have
a recepie on how to reproduce this from scratch?

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
      www.treskal.com/kalle
-
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]

  Powered by Linux