Hi, [finally, a technical argument on "dunno". Maybe we really need git-bikeshed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx? ;-)] On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Christian Couder wrote: > Le lundi 15 octobre 2007, Johannes Schindelin a ?crit : > > > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Christian Couder wrote: > > > > > > But the new "bisect_state" takes one more argument, because the first > > > one must be "good" "bad" or "dunno". > > > > > > So when there is only one argument HEAD is used, and when there are > > > 2 arguments, $2 is used as the good|bad|dunno rev. > > > > Ah, that explains it! But do you not need to do > > "2,bad|2,good|2,dunno" in that case? Or even better: "2,*"? > > Perhaps it would be an improvement at least in speed for "2,good" or > "2,dunno". I see: the later case catches them. Colour me satisfied with your patch. > I wanted to keep exactly the same processing as there was before, in case > something like "git bisect good v1.5.3.3..v1.5.3.4" was supported. But it > seems it doesn't work. I don't know if it's a bug or a feature. I think v1.5.3.3..v1.5.3.4 expands to ^v1.5.3.3 v1.5.3.4, which might explain what you are experiencing. OTOH "git bisect good v1.5.3.3..v1.5.3.4" does not make sense. bisect assumes that all ancestors of a good commit are good, too. Ciao, Dscho - 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
